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

Hi,

Please find attached a new version of the patch, answering to most of
your reviewing points. I'll post another version shortly with support
for pg_dump and alter owner/rename.

The main priority was to confirm that the implementation is conforming
to the rought specs and design we agreed before with Tom and Heikki, in
order to be able to adjust anything I would have misunderstood there.

Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> What's with removing the OBJECT_TABLESPACE case? Given that

Merge artifact or fat fingers, something like that.

> ExtensionControlFile seemed like a good name, just changing that to
> "ExtensionControl" doesn't seem as nice, tho that's a bit of bike
> shedding, I suppose.

Yeah, well, the values in there now can be fetched from a catalog, so I
though I should reflect that change somehow. Will revert to the previous
name if that's the consensus.

> I'm not sure we have a 'dile system'... :)
> Also pretty sure we only have one catalog
> ('get_ext_ver_list_from_catalogs')

Fixed.

> 'Template' seems like a really broad term which might end up being
> associated with things beyond extensions, yet there are a number of
> places where you just use 'TEMPLATE', eg, ACL_KIND_TEMPLATE. Seems like
> it might become an issue later.

Fixed. Any other straight TEMPLATE reference would be another error when
cleaning up the patch, though my reading tonight didn't catch'em.

> Also, no pg_dump/restore support..? Seems like that'd be useful..

Yeah, that's the obvious next step. The design is that we absolutely
want to dump and restore those templates, that's the key here :)

> That's just a real quick run-through with my notes. If this patch is
> really gonna go into 9.3, I'll try to take a deeper look.

Thanks for that!

Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support