Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Dropping extensions
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us writes: Hmm. I don't think we have any code in there to prohibit the same object from being made a member of two different extensions ... but this example suggests that maybe we had better check that. I see you did take care of that, thank you! http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=988620dd8c16d77f88ede167b22056176324 Regards, -- Dimitri Fontaine http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Dropping extensions
Marc Munro m...@bloodnok.com writes: In postgres 9.1 I have created 2 extensions, veil and veil_demo. When I install veil, it creates a default (not very useful) version of a function: veil_init(). When I create veil_demo, it replaces this version of the function with it's own (useful) version. If I drop the extension veil_demo, I am left with the veil_demo version of veil_init(). Is this a feature or a bug? Is there a work-around? Hmm. I don't think we have any code in there to prohibit the same object from being made a member of two different extensions ... but this example suggests that maybe we had better check that. In general, though, it is not intended that extension creation scripts use CREATE OR REPLACE, which I gather you must be doing. 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
Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Dropping extensions
On Sat, 2011-07-23 at 11:08 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: If I drop the extension veil_demo, I am left with the veil_demo version of veil_init(). Is this a feature or a bug? Is there a work-around? Hmm. I don't think we have any code in there to prohibit the same object from being made a member of two different extensions ... but this example suggests that maybe we had better check that. In general, though, it is not intended that extension creation scripts use CREATE OR REPLACE, which I gather you must be doing. That's right. Ultimately I'd like to be able to create a number of extensions, all further extending the base functionality of veil, with each one further extending veil_init(). I could consider a more generalised callback mechanism but that adds more complexity and overhead without really buying me anything functionally. I will look into it though. While it would be great to be able to return functions to their previous definition automatically, other simpler mechanisms might suffice. For me, being able to run a post-drop script would probably be adequate. For now, I will just add some notes to the documentation. Thanks for the response. __ Marc signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
