Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I think this breaks contrib/adminpack, and perhaps other extensions.
>> They'd not be hard to fix with script changes, but they'd be broken.
>> 
>> In general, we would now have a situation where relocatable extensions
>> could never be installed into pg_catalog.  That might be OK, but at
>> least it would need to be documented.
>> 
>> Also, I think we'd be pretty much hard-wiring the decision that pg_dump
>> will never dump objects in pg_catalog, because its method for selecting
>> the creation schema won't work in that case.  That probably is all right
>> too, but we need to realize it's a consequence of this.

> These are all good points.  I'm uncertain whether they are sufficient
> justification for abandoning this idea and looking for another
> solution, or whether we should live with them.  Any thoughts?

Given the lack of any good alternative proposals, I think we should
press ahead with this approach.  We still need doc updates and fixes
for the affected contrib module(s), though.  Also, in view of point 2,
it seems like the extensions code should test for and reject an attempt
to set a relocatable extension's schema to pg_catalog.  Otherwise you'd
be likely to get not-too-intelligible errors from the extension script.

                        regards, tom lane


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Reply via email to