Re: [PATCH] Store Extension Options

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Store Extension Options
Date: 2014-01-06 03:50:53
Message-ID: 7820.1388980253@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fabr=EDzio_de_Royes_Mello?= <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> You are correct. pg_dump export reloptions using "WITH" clause of CREATE
> TABLE statement. I.e.:

> CREATE TABLE foo (
> )
> WITH (autovacuum_enabled=false, bdr.do_replicate=false);

> So if this statement checks for 'bdr' extension is loaded then in partial
> restore it can be fail.

I see absolutely *nothing* wrong with failing that command if bdr is not
installed. For an analogy, if this table includes a column of type bar
defined by some extension baz, we are certainly going to fail the
CREATE TABLE if baz isn't installed.

Now, if bdr is installed but the validation doesn't happen unless bdr
is "loaded" in some sense, then that is an implementation deficiency
that I think we can insist be rectified before this feature is accepted.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2014-01-06 03:51:38 Re: Compiling extensions on Windows
Previous Message Tom Lane 2014-01-06 03:39:50 Re: [PATCH] Store Extension Options