Re: [HACKERS] Syncing sql extension versions with shared library versions

2017-07-25 Thread Craig Ringer
(Re-added hackers to Cc as this doesn't seem private, just accidentally didn't reply-all?) On 24 July 2017 at 23:50, Mat Arye wrote: > > > >> Issue 1: Preloading the right shared library. >> When preloading libraries (either via local_preload_libraries, or >>

Re: Fwd: [HACKERS] Syncing sql extension versions with shared library versions

2017-07-25 Thread Mat Arye
On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 6:16 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Mat Arye writes: > > On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 1:38 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> I'm not really sure why planner hooks would have anything to do with > your > >> exposed SQL API? > > >

Re: Fwd: [HACKERS] Syncing sql extension versions with shared library versions

2017-07-24 Thread Tom Lane
Mat Arye writes: > On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 1:38 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> I'm not really sure why planner hooks would have anything to do with your >> exposed SQL API? > Sorry what I meant was i'd like to package different versions of my > extension --

Fwd: [HACKERS] Syncing sql extension versions with shared library versions

2017-07-24 Thread Mat Arye
(adding -hackers back into thread, got dropped by my email client, sorry) On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 1:38 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Mat Arye writes: > > I tried looking in the contrib modules and didn't find many with lots of > > planner hook usage. > > I'm

Re: [HACKERS] Syncing sql extension versions with shared library versions

2017-07-24 Thread Mat Arye
On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Mat Arye wrote: > > (I > > want to avoid having to keep backwards-compatibility for all functions in > > future shared-libraries). > > Are you sure that's a good

Re: [HACKERS] Syncing sql extension versions with shared library versions

2017-07-22 Thread Craig Ringer
On 22 Jul. 2017 04:19, "Mat Arye" wrote: Hi All, I am developing the TimescaleDB extension for postgres ( https://github.com/timescale/timescaledb) and have some questions about versioning. First of all, I have to say that the versioning system on the sql side is

Re: [HACKERS] Syncing sql extension versions with shared library versions

2017-07-22 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Mat Arye wrote: >> (I >> want to avoid having to keep backwards-compatibility for all functions in >> future shared-libraries). > Are you sure that's a good idea? It seems like swimming upstream

Re: [HACKERS] Syncing sql extension versions with shared library versions

2017-07-22 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Mat Arye wrote: > (I > want to avoid having to keep backwards-compatibility for all functions in > future shared-libraries). Are you sure that's a good idea? It seems like swimming upstream against the design. I mean, instead of creating a

Re: [HACKERS] Syncing sql extension versions with shared library versions

2017-07-21 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 07/21/2017 04:17 PM, Mat Arye wrote: > Hi All, > > I am developing the TimescaleDB extension for postgres > (https://github.com/timescale/timescaledb) and have some questions > about versioning. First of all, I have to say that the versioning > system on the sql side is wonderful. It's really

[HACKERS] Syncing sql extension versions with shared library versions

2017-07-21 Thread Mat Arye
Hi All, I am developing the TimescaleDB extension for postgres ( https://github.com/timescale/timescaledb) and have some questions about versioning. First of all, I have to say that the versioning system on the sql side is wonderful. It's really simple to write migrations etc. However when