Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: > Not sure it's that easy. I think DROP LANGUAGE can't assume that the > language it's been told to drop is extension-ified. (Even if we do this
If CREATE LANGUAGE creates an extension of the same name, then DROP LANGUAGE can assume that there's an extension of the same name, right? > for all the core ones, there are a dozen non-core ones that might not > all get with the program right away.) How do we make this work in a way > that covers both cases, but doesn't turn DROP LANGUAGE into a security > hole that lets non-superusers drop random extensions? We could check that the extension named the same as the language only contains one object of class pg_language. > It may all work pretty easily, but I'm still caffeine-deprived so I'm > not sure ... It does not look like a big deal to me either. If you don't have the time too, I could propose a patch. Regards, -- Dimitri Fontaine http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers