From: | Aidan Van Dyk <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: ALTER EXTENSION UPGRADE, v3 |
Date: | 2011-02-10 21:41:47 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTinzXWrga9hU23sw3AnxxYLexuS72O-bNQKfTd+K@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 9:38 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Well, the difference is that loose objects are just on my system,
>> whereas extensions are supposed to work on anybody's system. I'm not
>> clear that it's possible to write an extension that depends on a
>> relocatable extension in a sensible way. If it is, objection
>> withdrawn.
>
> I don't deny that there are risks here. But I think the value of being
> able to move an extension when it is safe outweighs the difficulty that
> sometimes it isn't safe. I think we can leave making it safer as a
> topic for future investigation.
Personally, I'ld rather be able to install the *same*
extension/version in different schemas at the same time then move an
extension from 1 schema to another, although I have no problems with
extensions moving out under a function's foot (just like loose
objects).
a.
--
Aidan Van Dyk Create like a god,
aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca command like a king,
http://www.highrise.ca/ work like a slave.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-02-10 21:49:49 | Re: ALTER EXTENSION UPGRADE, v3 |
Previous Message | David E. Wheeler | 2011-02-10 21:39:41 | Re: ALTER EXTENSION UPGRADE, v3 |