| From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Joshua Tolley <eggyknap(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pg_execute_from_file review |
| Date: | 2010-12-06 19:18:14 |
| Message-ID: | 7BA78425-3C27-4B69-96E7-BE021D2C3C3C@kineticode.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Dec 6, 2010, at 11:12 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Well, I don't put any stock in the idea that it's important for existing
> module .sql files to be usable as-is as extension definition files. If
> it happens to fall out that way, fine, but we shouldn't give up anything
> else to get that.
I agree, but I don't think we have to lose anything.
> Letting extension files be directly sourceable in
> psql is probably worth a bit more, but I'm not sure how much. The
> argument that forgetting to include a magic source_path command would
> make CREATE EXTENSION behave surprisingly seems to have a good deal of
> merit though, certainly enough to justify having CREATE EXTENSION take
> care of that internally if at all possible.
Yes.
The other question I have, though, is how important is it to have extensions live in a particular schema since there seems to be no advantage to doing so. With the current patch, I can put extension "foo" in schema "bar", but I can't put any other extension named "foo" in any other schema. It's in schema "bar" but is at the same time global. That doesn't make much sense to me.
Best,
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2010-12-06 19:26:48 | Re: Per-column collation |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-12-06 19:12:48 | Re: pg_execute_from_file review |