On 07/18/2011 05:25 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Sandro Santilli <strk(at)keybit(dot)net> wrote:
>> Trying to exclude items from dumps of postgis-enabled databases
>> we use pg_restore -l output and strip what we think belong to PostGIS.
>> In doing so, Renzo found that for OPERATOR there are not enough
>> informations to unambiguosly find it being part of PostGIS (see
>> included mail snippet).
>> Do you think this could be improved on the pg_restore side ?
> In 9.1, we've added the concept of EXTENSIONs. I'm not sure whether
> PostGIS is planning to take advantage of this mechanism, but it's
> designed to solve exactly this problem.
The extensions concept will be a big step forward, no doubt.
I just do not think that it solves the aforementioned problem. AFAIK
the extension system will be available for 9.1 only. Then it would not
be available for all kinds of dump/restore scenarios <9.1 (in my case
from 8.4 to 9.0).
In response to
pgsql-bugs by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2011-07-20 14:59:15|
|Subject: Re: BUG #6124: overlaps |
|Previous:||From: hubert depesz lubaczewski||Date: 2011-07-20 11:43:12|
|Subject: Re: BUG #6124: overlaps|