Re: Core Extensions relocation
Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>
From: Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2011-11-15T01:14:08Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Updates to contrib/isn ISBN tables.
- 6d1af7b21807 9.1.0 cited
-
Add a "LIKE = typename" clause to CREATE TYPE for base types. This allows
- 3f936aacc057 8.4.0 cited
On 15 November 2011 00:56, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: > Greg, > > So I'm a bit unclear on why most of the optional data types were > excluded from your list of Core Extensions. I would regard the > following as stable and of general utility: > > btree_gin > btree_gist > citext > dblink > file_fdw > fuzzystrmatch > hstore > intarray > isn > ltree > pgcrypto > pg_trgm > unaccent > uuid-ossp Greg clarified on the core extensions page text: "These core extensions supply useful features in areas such as database diagnostics and performance monitoring." None of those others perform such a role. Instead they add additional functionality intended to be utilised as part of general data usage, adding new types, operators, query functions etc. Maybe the term "core" is inappropriate. Instead we might wish to refer to them as "utility extensions" or something like that, although that may be just as vague. > ... also, why is there still a "tsearch2" contrib module around at all? Backwards compatibility. No-one will use it except if they're coming from an older version. -- Thom Brown Twitter: @darkixion IRC (freenode): dark_ixion Registered Linux user: #516935 EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company