| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr> |
| Cc: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Upgrading Extension, version numbers |
| Date: | 2011-01-05 18:05:17 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTi=XLSR0=9_oabC+NWoHHZ8==4Yiq5N74YiQFSja@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 2:48 PM, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr> wrote:
> "David E. Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> writes:
>> As Tom pointed out, you can do the same with naming conventions by having scripts \i each other as appropriate.
>
> This is a deprecated idea, though. We're talking about the
> pg_execute_from_file() patch that has been applied, but without the
> pg_execute_sql_file() function. So that part is internal to the backend
> extension code and not available from SQL anymore.
>
> There's no consensus to publish a bakend \i like function. So there's
> no support for this upgrade script organizing you're promoting. Unless
> the consensus changes again (but a commit has been done).
My understanding of the consensus is that it wasn't felt necessary for
the purpose for which it was proposed. I think it could be
re-proposed with a different argument and very possibly accepted.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-01-05 18:08:28 | Re: Visual Studio 2010/Windows SDK 7.1 support |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2011-01-05 17:59:50 | Re: Visual Studio 2010/Windows SDK 7.1 support |