On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 12:00 PM, David E. Wheeler <da...@kineticode.com> wrote:
> These are really great points. I knew I wasn't thrilled about this suggest, > but wasn't sure why. Frankly, I think it will be really confusing to users > who think they have FooBar 1.2.2 installed but see only 1.2 in the database. > I don't think I would do that, personally. I'm much more inclined to have the > same extension version everywhere I can. Really, that means you just a sql function to your extension, somethign similary to uname -a, or rpm -qi, which includes something that is *forced* to change the postgresql catalog view of your extension every time you ship a new version (major, or patch), and then you get the exact version (and whatever else you include) for free every time you update ;-) The thing to remember is that the postgresql "extensions" are managing the *postgresql catalogs* view of things, even though the shared object used by postgresql to provide the particular catalog's requirements can be "fixed". If your extension is almost exclusively a shared object, and the only catalog things are a couple of functions defined to point into the C code, there really isn't anything catalog-wise that you need to "manage" for upgrades. -- Aidan Van Dyk Create like a god, ai...@highrise.ca command like a king, http://www.highrise.ca/ work like a slave. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
