| From: | Jan Wieck <jan(at)wi3ck(dot)info> |
|---|---|
| To: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_upgrade does not upgrade pg_stat_statements properly |
| Date: | 2021-07-29 18:14:56 |
| Message-ID: | c23c3355-e7a3-4fbe-2521-32d5944b48b3@wi3ck.info |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 7/29/21 2:04 PM, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 11:46:12AM -0400, Jan Wieck wrote:
>> > I don't have a ready example of such an extension, but if we ever would
>> > convert the backend parts of Slony into an extension, it would be one.
> FWIW I have an example of such an extension: powa-archivist extension
> script runs an anonymous block code and creates if needed a custom
> wrapper to emulate the current_setting(text, boolean) variant that
> doesn't exist on pre-pg96 servers.
>
Thank you!
I presume that pg_upgrade on a database with that extension installed
would silently succeed and have the pg_catalog as well as public (or
wherever) version of that function present.
Regards, Jan
--
Jan Wieck
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2021-07-29 18:19:17 | Re: pg_upgrade does not upgrade pg_stat_statements properly |
| Previous Message | Dean Rasheed | 2021-07-29 18:14:05 | Re: Numeric x^y for negative x |