Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
Anyway, as I said before, I don't object to installing plpgsql by
default. What I do object to is installing it in a way that makes it
difficult for the DBA to remove it, as would be the case if it were in
template0 for example.
Perhaps it can be installed in template1 after the copy, if a certain
initdb option is passed?
Yeah, we'd have to rejigger initdb a bit. The bigger problem is that
traditionally template0 has been seen as a backup for template1, and it
wouldn't be (quite) that if the initial contents are different.
Would it satisfy people if plpgsql were in postgres, but neither
template DB, after initdb? This would make it available to the sort of
person who's too lazy to learn about CREATE DATABASE, and one would
think that if they can handle CREATE DATABASE then CREATE LANGUAGE
is not beyond their powers.
I don't see any point in doing it at all unless it gets into new DBs by
default. So, no, I don't think that's going to be very helpful.
I don't see a huge problem in loading it to template1 after we copy
template1 to template0 - anyone who is going to touch template0 at any
time is likely to have enough postgres-fu to be able to manage.
cheers
andrew
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
