Re: The scope of extensions

On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
<guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> wrote:
>> > Every project I've worked on which uses PostgreSQL has independently
>> > implemented its own set of installation and upgrade scripts, which
>> > has typically included some form of table for storing the current
>> > schema version and other settings to allow the scripts to safely do
>> > their job.  However, I'm not a big fan of unnecessary wheel
>> > reinvention, and if PostgreSQL could provide a standard mechanism
>> > for doing this which all applications could utilise, that would be
>> > (IMO) an absolutely fantastic feature.  If extensions can be used
>> > as they stand to realise this, then that's absolutely great: the
>> > end user installation instructions can be reduced to
>> >   CREATE EXTENSION myapplication;
>> > and the equivalent for upgrades.  I'm not sure if another keyword
>> > would be useful in this context, since this is much more than a
>> > single extension, it's an entire schema.
>> >
>>
>> Won't work if you care to save your database with pg_dump. Any tables
>> created by extensions won't be saved with pg_dump. All you will get is a
>> "CREATE EXTENSION myapplication;", and no data.
>>
>
> Actually, I'm not completely right here. You may configure your
> extension to allow your tables to be dumped. See
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/interactive/extend-extensions.html#AEN51978 for details.
>
> IOW, it may work, but you need to be extra-careful. I don't know anyone
> doing this right now.

yeah -- it's a cute idea that may (or may not) work. other things
that may burn you is the order execution of create extension scripts?

merlin