Re: Having a problem with RoR-3.1.1 and Pg-9.1

From: "James B(dot) Byrne" <byrnejb(at)harte-lyne(dot)ca>
To: "Adrian Klaver" <adrian(dot)klaver(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Having a problem with RoR-3.1.1 and Pg-9.1
Date: 2012-02-28 18:37:19
Message-ID: 746a35953129a82f349b7dd60b7cba47.squirrel@webmail.harte-lyne.ca
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general


On Tue, February 28, 2012 12:52, Adrian Klaver wrote:
> On 02/28/2012 09:50 AM, James B. Byrne wrote:
>>
>>
>> Sigh. I will have to think on this before changing
>> anything.
>>
>> To my mind, the most straight-forward way of dealing
>> with
>> this is to remove the language from template1
>> altogether.
>> Thereafter, the db owner must explicitly add it back in
>> where required. So, the default would be no extension.
>
> Well that is how it was prior to 9.0.
>

It does not now appear to be the case. When I drop the
test database and attempt to recreate it the plpgsql
extension is automatically added back in with postgres as
the owner. This was a new installation of 9.1 and I have
made no modifications to the templates whatsoever.

template1=# \dx
List of installed extensions
Name | Version | Schema | Description
---------+---------+------------+------------------------------
plpgsql | 1.0 | pg_catalog | PL/pgSQL procedural
language

--
*** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel ***
James B. Byrne mailto:ByrneJB(at)Harte-Lyne(dot)ca
Harte & Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca
9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241
Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757
Canada L8E 3C3

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message James B. Byrne 2012-02-28 18:52:44 Re: Having a problem with RoR-3.1.1 and Pg-9.1
Previous Message akp geek 2012-02-28 18:28:37 version controlling postgresql code