Re: Extensions vs PGXS' MODULE_PATHNAME handling

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Extensions vs PGXS' MODULE_PATHNAME handling
Date: 2011-02-16 23:03:45
Message-ID: 9560.1297897425@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> [ scratches head ... ] Why is your version generating so many
>> unnecessary @extschema@ uses?

> I just ran create table tomlist as select your query and create table
> dimlist as select my query, then:
> ...
> No difference on @extschema@ use here.

Well, when I did it I only got @extschema@ uses in tsearch2 (see the
committed update scripts), so there's *something* different about what
you're doing. I'm unsure what.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-02-16 23:10:25 Re: Fix corner case for binary upgrade: extension functions in pg_catalog.
Previous Message Gurjeet Singh 2011-02-16 23:02:18 Re: Fix for Index Advisor related hooks