Re: [HACKERS] "Extension" versus "module"

Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> writes:
> Another concern has to do with PLs. We said that with the dependency
> mechanism it would be good to have PLs be EXTENSIONs. But those are
> core provided extensions, one of them installed by default.

> If we make PLs extensions, we might also want to have CREATE LANGUAGE
> either ERROR out or silently do the CREATE EXTENSION instead, meaning
> that CREATE LANGUAGE behavior would depend on creating_extension.
> Sounds like a crock but ensures compatibility.

Yeah. I was sort of wondering whether we could get rid of pg_pltemplate
altogether, and instead rely on the extension mechanism to package up
the correct parameters for installing a language. However, one thing
that'd have to be solved before going very far in this direction is the
question of allowing CREATE EXTENSION to non-superusers. We'd at least
need to be able to duplicate the current functionality of allowing
CREATE LANGUAGE to database owners (with an override available to the
DBA).

This seems like a matter for a separate thread though, and not on
pgsql-docs.

regards, tom lane