Anssi Kääriäinen <anssi.kaariai...@thl.fi> writes: > The only question here is should CREATE OR REPLACE be allowed. I just
Yes. Think ALTER EXTENSION UPGRADE, the next patch in the series (already proposed for this CF too). > realized this could present a new problem. If I am not mistaken, when > loading from dump, you suddenly get the extension's version back, not the > one you defined in CREATE OR REPLACE. If this is the case, this should NOT > be allowed. And by the same reasoning, ALTER FUNCTION [anything] should not > be allowed either. Or at least then the function/(or any object for that > matter) should be restored somehow from the backup, not from the extension > files. Well ideally those will get into extension's upgrade scripts, not be typed interactively by superusers. But I don't think we should limit the capability of superusers to quickly fix a packaging mistake… > I still haven't had the time to start pg_dump reviewing, so I haven't > verified if this is really a problem. But I suspect so... Both a problem when badly used and a good thing to have sometime, as in the upgrade scripts :) -- 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
