On Tue, 2013-12-03 at 14:31 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> writes: > > When it comes to dump/reload, I'd much rather see a mechanism which uses > > our deep understanding of the extension's objects (as database objects) > > to implement the dump/reload than a text blob which is carried forward > > from major version to major version and may even fail to run. > > Note that we're already doing that in the binary_upgrade code path. > I agree that generalizing that approach sounds like a better idea > than keeping a text blob around.
So does this take us fully back to Inline Extensions, or is there a distinction that I'm missing? I still don't see that Extension Templates are all bad: * They preserve the fact that two instances of the same extension (e.g. in different databases) were created from the same template. * They mirror the file-based templates, so it seems easier to get consistent behavior. Regards, Jeff Davis -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers