Re: in-catalog Extension Scripts and Control parameters (templates?)

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>
Cc: Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: in-catalog Extension Scripts and Control parameters (templates?)
Date: 2013-06-27 15:45:43
Message-ID: CA+Tgmobf6kFCTtrZ7Q7EUy-g=5980SKA0d7tdXhHjuTqD-EX-A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 5:49 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
<dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr> wrote:
> I think that's a limitation of the old model and we don't want to turn
> templates for extensions into being shared catalogs. At least that's my
> understanding of the design consensus.

I agree.

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

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fujii Masao 2013-06-27 15:47:36 Re: fixing pg_ctl with relative paths
Previous Message Robert Haas 2013-06-27 15:44:28 Re: MD5 aggregate