* Marko Kreen (mark...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Sat, May 04, 2013 at 10:57:44PM +0200, Dimitri Fontaine wrote: > > Other than adminpack, I know of PGQ installing their objects in > > pg_catalog. They only began doing that when switching to the CREATE > > EXTENSION facility. And they set relocatable to false. > > FYI - PgQ and related modules install no objects into pg_catalog. > > I used schema='pg_catalog' because I had trouble getting schema='pgq' > to work. I wanted 'pgq' schema to live and die with extension, > and that was only way I got it to work on 9.1.
I've read through this thread and I think you're the only person here
that I actually agree with.. I like the idea of having a schema that
lives & dies with an extension. imv, putting random objects (of ANY
kind) into pg_catalog is a bad idea. Sure, it's convenient because it's
always in your search_path, but that, imv, means we should have a way to
say "these schemas are always in the search_path", not that we should
encourage people to dump crap into pg_catalog.
Thanks,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
