Jim Nasby <jim.na...@bluetreble.com> writes: > As for PGXN being an untrusted source, that's something that it's in the > project's best interest to try and address somehow, perhaps by having > formally audited extensions. Amazon already has to do this to some > degree before an extension can be allowed in RDS, and so does Heroku, so > maybe that would be a starting point.
> I think a big reason Postgres got to where it is today is because of > it's superior extensibility, and I think continuing to encourage that > with formal support for things like PGXN is important. Yeah. Auditing strikes me as a fine example of something for which there is no *technical* reason to need to put it in core. It might need some more hooks than we have now, but that's no big deal. In the long run, we'll be a lot better off if we can address the non-technical factors that make people want to push such things into the core distribution. Exactly how we get there, I don't pretend to know. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers