Chapman Flack <c...@anastigmatix.net> writes: > I've been looking a little more deeply at the extension mechanism, > trying to answer my own question about what happens once there have > been several releases of an extension, and the extensions directory > is now populated with a bunch of files quux--1.0.sql, quux--1.1.sql, > quux--1.0--1.1.sql, quux--1.1--1.0.sql, ..., quux.control. > And somewhere in $libdir there are quux-1.0.so, quux-1.1.so.
Well, at least so far as the existing extensions in contrib are concerned, there are *not* version numbers in the .so filenames. This means you can't have more than one version of the .so installed at once, but we've not really found a need for that. It's usually feasible --- and desirable --- to keep ABI compatibility to the extent that the new .so can be swapped in for the old without needing to change the SQL function definitions immediately. I agree that MODULE_PATHNAME isn't an adequate mechanism if you want to have version numbers in the .so filenames. We could think about providing some solution for that, perhaps along the lines of a %v escape such as you suggest, but it would take awhile for that to get into the field. Avoiding MODULE_PATHNAME in favor of writing out the versioned .so name in the .sql files is probably the path of least resistance. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers