Tatsuo Ishii <is...@sraoss.co.jp> wrote: > > The proposal will be acceptable only when all of the technical issues > > are solved. The libSQL should also be available in stand-alone. > > It should not be a collection of half-baked functions. > > What do you mean by "should also be available in stand-alone"? If you > want more abstract API than "libSQL", you could invent such a thing > based on it as much as you like. IMO anything need to parse/operate > the raw parse tree should be in libSQL.
My "stand-alone" means libSQL can be used from many modules without duplicated codes. For example, copy routines for raw parse trees should be in the DLL rather than in postgres.exe. Then, we need to consider other products than pgpool. Who will use the dll? If pgpool is the only user, we might not allow to modify core codes only for one usecase. More research other than pgpool is required to decide the interface routines for libSQL. Regards, --- Takahiro Itagaki NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
