On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 3:18 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
> Sorry for the delays, I'm back on PostgreSQL related work again.
> Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>>> I just tried DROP EXTENSION now, and found it broken :(
> Please find v2 of the patch. I did change the dependency management in
> between the simple cases and the more challenging ones and forgot that I
> had to retest it all in between, which is what happen on a tight
> schedule and when working at night, I guess.
The patch is partially rejected due to the pg_proc column changes from
leakproof, but I could apply manually.
I confirmed DROP EXTENSION is fixed now. In turn, it seems to me
"requires" doesn't work. My test ext2.control looks like:
comment = 'sample1'
default_version = '1.0'
requires = 'featZ'
relocatable = true
And simply this extension can be installed against cleanly-initialized
database. I double-checked there's no entry for featz in
Also, I found that if control file has duplicate names in "provides",
the error is not friendly ("duplicate entry for pg_extension_feature",
or something). This is same if "provides" has the extension name
I'll have a look more but give comments so far so that you can find
solutions to them soon.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Marko Kreen||Date: 2012-02-23 12:34:16|
|Subject: Re: Speed dblink using alternate libpq tuple storage|
|Previous:||From: Greg Smith||Date: 2012-02-23 11:17:32|
|Subject: Re: Initial 9.2 pgbench write results|