Re: extension_control_path

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> I think we should get rid of the module_pathname business, and
> extensions' SQL files should just refer to the base file name and rely
> on the dynamic library path to find the files. What would we lose if we
> did that?

Control over *which* mylib.so file gets loaded for a specific sql
script. That's the whole namespace issue Stephen is worried about.

If you're testing the new version of an extension before installing it
properly, then you will have the current and the new versions of the
.so, with the exact same name, at different places.

Note that when using base file name only, then you could also have a
clash with a dynamic library of the same name installed on the system,
even if not made to be loaded by PostgreSQL.

Some extensions are using way too generic names. Hint: prefix.so.

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