Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Problems with pg_restore (plpgsql already exists)

From: Brian Weaver <cmdrclueless(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>
Cc: "pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Problems with pg_restore (plpgsql already exists)
Date: 2012-02-25 16:18:24
Message-ID: 17919563-C079-438C-9702-5A0806127DFD@gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin
Guillaume, 

Thanks for the pointer. Is it just me that finds it the behavior of pg_restore odd? If the default installation since 9.0 has PL/PgSQL installed then why does pg_restore still emit statements to create the language? As a developer by trade it smells like a bug. 

-- Brian

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 25, 2012, at 10:31, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> wrote:

> On Fri, 2012-02-24 at 22:12 -0500, Brian Weaver wrote:
>> So when did the installation of PL/PgSQL into all databases become standard
>> operating procedure? It wasn't standard (or at least it didn't choke) on
>> the installation of versions 8.3 and 8.4 that I have used on CentOS 5.
>> 
>> Seems like a fairly substantial change. Did I miss it in the release notes?
>> 
> 
> Since 9.0, it's the third item in the overview list of the release notes
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/release-9-0.html.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Guillaume
> http://blog.guillaume.lelarge.info
> http://www.dalibo.com
> 

In response to

Responses

pgsql-admin by date

Next:From: Scott RibeDate: 2012-02-25 16:23:50
Subject: Re: Problems with pg_restore (plpgsql already exists)
Previous:From: Guillaume LelargeDate: 2012-02-25 15:31:43
Subject: Re: Problems with pg_restore (plpgsql already exists)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group