Re: contrib loose ends: 9.0 to 9.1 incompatibilities

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 9:13 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> 2. intarray and tsearch2 use some core support functions in their
>> GIN opclasses, and those support functions changed signatures in 9.1.
>> The current solution to this involves having stub functions in core
>> with the old signatures; when you do an upgrade from the 9.0 version
>> of one of these contrib modules, its opclass will be pointing at the
>> stub version instead of the preferred version. I guess we could fix
>> that with a direct UPDATE on pg_amproc but I'm not sure that's a
>> good idea. Note these functions aren't actually *members* of the
>> extensions, just things it references, so the odds of future trouble
>> seem pretty small. On the other hand, if we don't do this, it's
>> unclear when we'll ever be able to get rid of the stubs.
>>
>> Comments?

> ISTM that the pg_amproc entries are part of the operator class, which
> is owned by the extension. So it's the upgrade script's job to leave
> the operator class in the right state.

OK, I held my nose and inserted UPDATE commands to make the opclasses
match. AFAICT the only remaining discrepancy between contrib modules
made fresh in 9.1 and those updated from 9.0 is the question of citext's
collation property, which as noted in the other thread is not worth
dealing with until the collation stuff is a bit better thought out.

regards, tom lane