On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > requires, relocatable and schema: These are problematic, because it's not > out of the question that someone might want to change these properties > from one version to another. But as things are currently set up, we must > know these things before we start to run the extension script, because > they are needed to set up the search_path correctly.
My biggest concern with this extensions work is that these variables are poorly designed. The extension mechanism is basically the equivalent of RPM for inside the database. And while in theory there is such a thing as a relocatable RPM, I don't know that I've ever used it, at least not successfully. I'm worried this is going to be a pretty serious rough edge that's difficult to file down later. Forcing everything into a single schema (like pg_extension) seems a bit too draconian, but this idea that you can install things wherever you like and somehow it's gonna just work seems pretty optimistic. However, that's a side point. The overall design you propose seems reasonable to me. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
