Re: ALTER EXTENSION UPGRADE, v3

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I don't think we should commit something that for 9.1 that we may need
> to change incompatibly for 9.2. If we're not completely happy with
> it, it gets booted. Whatever we put in place here is going to be with
> us for a long, long time.

So, what is it specifically here that you're unhappy with?

a. ALTER EXTENSION ... UPGRADE;
b. CREATE WRAPPER EXTENSION ...; (version is then NULL)
c. upgrade rules in the control file
d. ALTER OBJECT ... SET EXTENSION ...;
e. having upgrade scripts for upgrading contribs from null
f. having those scripts named $contrib.upgrade.sql

What I think is that the end-user syntax (the SQL DDLs) that we add are
going to fall exactly into the category you're talking about: long, long
term support.

But that could well be less true of the control file, should we choose
so. I think there's enough value in being able to get extension from
what you had installed in pre-9.1; that changing some non-DLL bits in
9.2 is something we can set ourselves to consider.

But anyway, we've been doing quite a round of expectations, explaining,
detailing, and bikeshedding on the features already, so I'd like to see
a break down, because it appears clearly that some readers changed their
mind in the process.

Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support