From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Final /contrib cleanup -- yes/no? |
Date: | 2008-11-06 22:24:09 |
Message-ID: | 16137.1226010249@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> The way the SQL scripts currently work, there is no way to manage what
> schema the contrib modules get built in *except* to edit the scripts.
Right, that's the intended and documented way to do it.
> In fact, because of the SET statements, a DBA who might *reasonably*
> expect that setting PGOPTIONS would allow him to determine that will be
> unpleasantly surprised when the module ends up in "public" anyway.
I don't see that this is a reasonable expectation; it has never worked
in any previous release, and the documentation explicitly says to do the
other. Also, at least some of the proposed forms of a module facility
would have the effect of overriding any such approach anyhow.
Again, I'm not for whacking around the procedures for dealing with
contrib each time we make a release. We should change it once when we
have a shot at getting it right.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joshua Tolley | 2008-11-06 22:33:09 | Re: Proposed Patch to Improve Performance of Multi-Batch Hash Join for Skewed Data Sets |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2008-11-06 22:13:09 | Re: Final /contrib cleanup -- yes/no? |