On Apr 3, 2013, at 11:41 AM, Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Oh, they are not unique per-schema? I guess they are global to the database
>> but then their objects are in the specified schema, then.
>
> Right -- an extension is not considered to live within a schema, they
> are database-global. The objects might live in a particular schema (if
> it is "relocatable"), and there's support to move those to a different
> schema, but this doesn't affect the extension itself.
Thanks. I humbly submit this patch to help prevent silly questions like this in
the future.
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_extension.sgml
b/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_extension.sgml
index 4f3b9a5..4ab3dff 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_extension.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_extension.sgml
@@ -93,6 +93,8 @@ CREATE EXTENSION [ IF NOT EXISTS ] <replaceable
class="parameter">extension_name
relocated. The named schema must already exist.
If not specified, and the extension's control file does not specify a
schema either, the current default object creation schema is used.
+ Note that only the extension objects will be placed into the named
+ schema; the extension itself is a database-global object.
</para>
</listitem>
</varlistentry>
Best,
David
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
