On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 1:09 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> > There are several possible methods of doing that, but I think the best
> > one is just to leave the SQL-callable C functions in fuzzystrmatch and
> > move only the underlying code that supports into core.
> I hadn't been paying close attention to this thread, but I'd just assumed
> that that would be the approach.
> It might be worth introducing new differently-named pg_proc entries for
> the same functions in core, but only if we can agree that there are better
> names for them than what the extension uses.
Yes, that's a point I raised upthread as well. What about renaming those
functions as string_distance and string_distance_less_than? Then have only
fuzzystrmatch do some DirectFunctionCall using the in-core functions?