On Sat, 2011-07-23 at 11:08 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > If I drop the extension veil_demo, I am left with the veil_demo version > > of veil_init(). > > > Is this a feature or a bug? Is there a work-around? > > Hmm. I don't think we have any code in there to prohibit the same > object from being made a member of two different extensions ... but this > example suggests that maybe we had better check that. > > In general, though, it is not intended that extension creation scripts > use CREATE OR REPLACE, which I gather you must be doing.
That's right. Ultimately I'd like to be able to create a number of extensions, all further extending the base functionality of veil, with each one further extending veil_init(). I could consider a more generalised callback mechanism but that adds more complexity and overhead without really buying me anything functionally. I will look into it though. While it would be great to be able to return functions to their previous definition automatically, other simpler mechanisms might suffice. For me, being able to run a post-drop script would probably be adequate. For now, I will just add some notes to the documentation. Thanks for the response. __ Marc
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
