On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 6:30 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > OK, I'll bite. I've been trying to stay out of this thread, but I > really *don't* understand what this patch is about. Extensions, as > they exist today, are installed from the filesystem and their contents > are not dumped. You're trying to create a new kind of extension which > is installed from the system catalogs (instead of the file system) and > is dumped. Why should anyone want that? > > It seems that part of the answer is that people would like to be able > to install extensions via libpq. You could almost write a client-side > tool for that today just by using adminpack to write the files to the > server, but you'd trip over the fact that files written by adminpack > must be in either the data directory or the log directory. But we > could fix that easily enough.
Just tossing an idea out there. What if you could install an extension by specifying not a local file name but a URL. Obviously there's a security issue but for example we could allow only https URLs with verified domain names that are in a list of approved domain names specified by a GUC. -- greg -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
