Re: Extension Templates S03E11

On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 6:30 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> OK, I'll bite. I've been trying to stay out of this thread, but I
> really *don't* understand what this patch is about. Extensions, as
> they exist today, are installed from the filesystem and their contents
> are not dumped. You're trying to create a new kind of extension which
> is installed from the system catalogs (instead of the file system) and
> is dumped. Why should anyone want that?
>
> It seems that part of the answer is that people would like to be able
> to install extensions via libpq. You could almost write a client-side
> tool for that today just by using adminpack to write the files to the
> server, but you'd trip over the fact that files written by adminpack
> must be in either the data directory or the log directory. But we
> could fix that easily enough.

Just tossing an idea out there. What if you could install an extension
by specifying not a local file name but a URL. Obviously there's a
security issue but for example we could allow only https URLs with
verified domain names that are in a list of approved domain names
specified by a GUC.

--
greg