"David E. Wheeler" <da...@kineticode.com> writes: > On Jul 23, 2009, at 1:08 AM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote: >> Easy answer for first version: don't allow user to install extension in >> another place than what we think will better suit him, and that's the >> new schema pg_extension, which always lies just before pg_catalog in the >> search_path. > > Well, I think that it's reasonable to allow an extension to be in any > schema, with the default being pg_extension, but all of the objects in a > single extension should assume that they're all in the same schema, at > least to start. I mean, I can see the need for secondary schemas (or > sub-schemas?) for encapsulation, but do we really need to go there in the > first rev?
Well the problem with that is if for example I define foo() and bar() functions in my extension, and the user also has a foo() function in his own stuff (possibly lying in public, say). Now if in my extenion in function bar() I call foo(), how do I make sure I'm calling my extension's foo()? -- dim -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers