On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 10:19:23AM +0100, Dimitri Fontaine wrote: > David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> writes: > > One could imagine that an extension was updated more quickly than > > PostgreSQL major versions come out, or at least not at the exact same > > time. > > Sure, but I don't see what your proposed syntax is giving us here.
The syntax by itself does nothing, but the underlying capability gives users: - The ability to have versions of software on different databases on the same system. - The ability to do deterministic upgrades, rather than just, "upgrade me to the latest, which may be buggy and/or slow things down to avoid a problem I know I don't have." > Currently the new version you're upgraded to is the one installed on > the file system, and whose .so has already been upgraded, and that's > it. > > I still need a better grasp at what your proposal is about to > comment and integrate, I fear. I am not saying that this is a show-stopper. I *am* saying that multiple concurrent versions and deterministic upgrades are common enough requests that you shouldn't do things that would prevent those in the future. Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fet...@gmail.com iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
