From: | Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Jan-Peter(dot)Seifert(at)gmx(dot)de, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #7820: Extension uuid-ossp cannot be installed on Windows - getting syntax error |
Date: | 2013-01-22 23:26:32 |
Message-ID: | CAAZKuFZd+MLyguziQ7_YkigUXs4TPOjpPxYXgBadrug6W+ZX+Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> writes:
>> On 22.01.2013 15:31, Jan-Peter(dot)Seifert(at)gmx(dot)de wrote:
>> Try:
>> CREATE EXTENSION "uuid-ossp"
>
> Although this isn't a bug, it does seem like a usability fail.
> Did we make a conscious decision not to call the extension uuid_ossp?
> I can't remember one way or the other. It's probably too late to change
> now, though :-(
I sort of have good recollection of the history here, I think, because
people have asked me about it quite a few times.... uuid-ossp.sql,
pre CREATE EXTENSION was always named as such, so carrying forward the
most obvious port to CREATE EXTENSION results in a non-SQL safe
identifier. Pre CREATE EXTENSION it didn't seem obvious that it would
matter how the extension would be named, as long as it looked okay in
psql -f or psql \i, which it did.
Considering the history, most people seem to understand how things
ended up in this way, although it's still a little annoying, and
definitely confusing.
--
fdr
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2013-01-22 23:32:43 | Re: BUG #7814: Rotation of the log is not carried out. |
Previous Message | Jeff Janes | 2013-01-22 22:59:18 | Re: BUG #7814: Rotation of the log is not carried out. |