| From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Extension upgrade, patch v0: debug help needed |
| Date: | 2011-01-03 19:13:26 |
| Message-ID: | 63475B7A-944F-4C8E-BE73-7BD928D4F381@kineticode.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Jan 1, 2011, at 2:30 PM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
> To support that is quite simple in fact, as the following commands will
> do the trick:
>
> CREATE WRAPPER EXTENSION ...; -- don't run the script
> ALTER OBJECT ... SET EXTENSION ...; -- that's in the upgrade script
> ALTER EXTENSION ... UPGRADE; -- as "usual"
I rather doubt that "WRAPPER" will be accepted as a reserved word in the grammar.
> Here's an example:
>
> dim=# \i ~/pgsql/exts/share/contrib/lo.sql
> CREATE DOMAIN
> CREATE FUNCTION
> CREATE FUNCTION
>
> dim=# create wrapper extension lo;
> CREATE EXTENSION
What happened to your UPGRADE from NULL idea?
> The WRAPPER keyword meaning is that we're only creating the catalog
> entry, forcing version to NULL and not running the extension's script.
> This keyword looked like the best choice from existing ones in our
> grammar, please feel free to pick any other phrase here.
I don't see why it's necessary at all.
Best,
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-01-03 19:18:23 | Re: pg_dump --split patch |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-01-03 19:11:23 | Re: Re: new patch of MERGE (merge_204) & a question about duplicated ctid |