Re: ALTER EXTENSION UPGRADE, v3

From: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: 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 18:09:08
Message-ID: C99B6F73-DE75-4D2A-8960-92092AC77DA6@kineticode.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Feb 11, 2011, at 10:06 AM, Tom Lane wrote:

> Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> writes:
>> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>>> Hmm. To make that work, we'd have to have ALTER EXTENSION UPDATE use a
>>> different default version name from what CREATE EXTENSION uses (unless
>
>> Yes. I see that as a good feature to have. stable and support looks
>> like good default aliases for me, but again, IANANS (native speaker).
>
> I'm not very happy with that at all, either as to the concept or the
> specific version-alias names. I don't think that CREATE and ALTER
> really need different default version targets. And those choices of
> names carry far too much baggage. "Default" is what they are as far as
> the system is concerned, but names like those imply a lot more.
>
> Anybody else have an opinion on this detail?

I think they should be the same. Anything else seems confusing and weird.

Best,

David

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2011-02-11 18:09:32 Re: Range Types: << >> -|- ops vs empty range
Previous Message Erik Rijkers 2011-02-11 18:08:43 Re: Range Types: << >> -|- ops vs empty range