Re: ALTER EXTENSION .. ADD/DROP weirdness

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: ALTER EXTENSION .. ADD/DROP weirdness
Date: 2011-10-10 18:08:23
Message-ID: CA+TgmoYN=7EnO2TFc4ow-X6vT9f6ZZuxKt0YrUmiFxXm9j4_6w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 12:34 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> rhaas=# alter extension pg_stat_statements drop type pg_stat_statements[];
>> ERROR:  syntax error at or near "["
>> LINE 1: ...extension pg_stat_statements drop type pg_stat_statements[];
>>                                                                     ^
>
>> Hmm.  So just how do I do this?
>
> "alter extension pg_stat_statements drop type _pg_stat_statements",
> probably.

*tests*

Yeah, that works. But it seems undesirable for people writing upgrade
scripts to need to count on the way we generate internal type names
for array types.

But there's a bigger problem: it seems to me that we have an
inconsistency between what happens when you create an extension from
scratch and when you upgrade it from unpackaged. Both pg_buffercache
and pg_stat_statements just do this in the "upgrade from unpackaged"
case:

ALTER EXTENSION <ext-name> ADD view <view-name>;

They do *not* add the type and the array type. But when the "1.0"
script is run, the type and array type end up belonging to the
extension. This seems bad.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Sabino Mullane 2011-10-10 18:25:59 Overhead cost of Serializable Snapshot Isolation
Previous Message Thom Brown 2011-10-10 18:06:16 Re: Range Types - typo + NULL string constructor