From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | marc(at)bloodnok(dot)com |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] Dropping extensions |
Date: | 2011-07-23 15:08:52 |
Message-ID: | 2961.1311433732@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Marc Munro <marc(at)bloodnok(dot)com> writes:
> In postgres 9.1 I have created 2 extensions, veil and veil_demo. When I
> install veil, it creates a default (not very useful) version of a
> function: veil_init().
> When I create veil_demo, it replaces this version of the function with
> it's own (useful) version.
> If I drop the extension veil_demo, I am left with the veil_demo version
> of veil_init().
> Is this a feature or a bug? Is there a work-around?
Hmm. I don't think we have any code in there to prohibit the same
object from being made a member of two different extensions ... but this
example suggests that maybe we had better check that.
In general, though, it is not intended that extension creation scripts
use CREATE OR REPLACE, which I gather you must be doing.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Godofredo Contreras | 2011-07-23 15:39:52 | Question about uuid_generate_v3 |
Previous Message | Pablo Romero Abiti | 2011-07-23 14:49:43 | Re : Update columns in same table from update trigger? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Florian Pflug | 2011-07-23 15:49:37 | XPATH vs. server_encoding != UTF-8 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-07-23 15:05:12 | Re: Questions and experiences writing a Foreign Data Wrapper |