Re: pg_execute_from_file review

From: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
To: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Joshua Tolley <eggyknap(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_execute_from_file review
Date: 2010-12-07 21:30:11
Message-ID: E5827EF1-E589-42FF-8237-5906031E9262@kineticode.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Dec 7, 2010, at 1:17 PM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:

>> Anyway, in a less blue-sky vein: we could fix some of these problems by
>> having an explicit relocatable-or-not property for extensions. If it is
>> relocatable, it's required to keep all its owned objects in the target
>> schema, and ALTER EXTENSION .. SET SCHEMA is allowed; else not. This
>> does nothing for the fix-the-search_path-property problem, though.
>
> The search_path is the complex (as in AI complete) part of it, but given
> your idea here, we could make it so that only the non-relocatable
> extensions benefit from the @extschema@ placeholder.

+1

That might be an appropriate compromise.

Best,

David

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-12-07 21:50:13 Re: pg_execute_from_file review
Previous Message David E. Wheeler 2010-12-07 21:29:15 Re: Review: Extensions Patch