| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: CREATE EXTENSION BLOCKS |
| Date: | 2013-04-04 21:11:18 |
| Message-ID: | 11484.1365109878@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"David E. Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com> writes:
> On Apr 3, 2013, at 11:41 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> Right -- an extension is not considered to live within a schema, they
>> are database-global. The objects might live in a particular schema (if
>> it is "relocatable"), and there's support to move those to a different
>> schema, but this doesn't affect the extension itself.
> Thanks. I humbly submit this patch to help prevent silly questions like this in the future.
I think this should be addressed in extend.sgml not only on the CREATE
EXTENSION reference page. After thinking awhile I came up with the
attached wording. Further wordsmithing anyone?
regards, tom lane
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| extension-vs-schema.patch | text/x-patch | 1.6 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Janes | 2013-04-04 21:21:19 | Re: corrupt pages detected by enabling checksums |
| Previous Message | ktm@rice.edu | 2013-04-04 21:11:13 | Re: Hash Join cost estimates |