| From: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | Aidan Van Dyk <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: ALTER EXTENSION UPGRADE, v3 |
| Date: | 2011-02-11 20:31:18 |
| Message-ID: | m2r5be5n55.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Aidan Van Dyk <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca> writes:
> So, I like that the attempt is to support multiple versions. But
> unless you can manage the files (both shared libraries, and any
> scripts to create/update SQL objects) for different version
> independently, I can't see the "multiple versions at once" capabilites
> that are being discussed being actually being used by anything more
> than the most basic extensions...
No, you're missing the use case here I think. It's all about releasing
minor upgrades (of extensions) and allowing users to jump through more
than one of them at a time. Like upgrading from 1.1.0 to 1.3.5.
> Just like if I need a bugfix of PostgreSQL 8.4, I'm not forced to
> *install* 9.0, because PG has decide that the proper way to release
> ist o make a single release of all versions.
If you have extension which needs multiple major version releases, then
yes, as PostgreSQL packages, you need to put the extension major version
number into its name. I don't see that as a problem of the mechanisms
proposed here.
Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2011-02-11 20:32:08 | Re: Debian readline/libedit breakage |
| Previous Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2011-02-11 20:28:05 | Re: ALTER EXTENSION UPGRADE, v3 |