| From: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> | 
| Cc: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>, "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> | 
| Subject: | Re: Quick Extensions Question | 
| Date: | 2011-03-03 16:29:13 | 
| Message-ID: | m2hbbkyxpi.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Not sure it's that easy.  I think DROP LANGUAGE can't assume that the
> language it's been told to drop is extension-ified.  (Even if we do this
If CREATE LANGUAGE creates an extension of the same name, then DROP
LANGUAGE can assume that there's an extension of the same name, right?
> for all the core ones, there are a dozen non-core ones that might not
> all get with the program right away.)  How do we make this work in a way
> that covers both cases, but doesn't turn DROP LANGUAGE into a security
> hole that lets non-superusers drop random extensions?
We could check that the extension named the same as the language only
contains one object of class pg_language.
> It may all work pretty easily, but I'm still caffeine-deprived so I'm
> not sure ...
It does not look like a big deal to me either.  If you don't have the
time too, I could propose a patch.
Regards,
-- 
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr     PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-03-03 16:30:55 | Re: Quick Extensions Question | 
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2011-03-03 16:26:59 | Re: Open unmatch source file when step into parse_analyze() in Eclipse? |