Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Displaying accumulated autovacuum cost

From: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>
To: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Displaying accumulated autovacuum cost
Date: 2012-02-21 21:44:04
Message-ID: m2d3977tgb.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>> Though I'm not familiar with CREATE EXTENSION. Why did you exclude 1.0.sql
>>> from DATA? In hstore/Makefile, 1.0.sql is included. You think we should prevent
>>> old version (i.e., 1.0) of pg_stat_statements from being used in 9.2?
>>
>> I'm not sure.  My feeling is that we probably don't want to ship all
>> the old scripts forever.  People should install the latest version,
>> and use the upgrade scripts to get there if they have an older one.
>> So my gut feeling here is to change hstore to exclude that file rather
>> than adding it here.  Any other opinions?

The problem with the hstore scripts is that you had to copy the 1.0
script, change a couple of lines, and call that 1.1, and you also had to
provide the 1.0--1.1 script file.

The solution would be to be able to create hstore 1.1 from 1.0
automatically and I sent over a very simple patch to do that, albeit
after the deadline for the current CF (that's why it's not listed).

Maybe that's simple enough to be considered? (re-attaching here)

 b/contrib/hstore/Makefile          |    2 
 b/contrib/hstore/hstore.control    |    1 
 b/src/backend/commands/extension.c |   83 +++--
 contrib/hstore/hstore--1.1.sql     |  524 -------------------------------------
 4 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 553 deletions(-)

> Agreed. But I wonder why VERSION option is usable in CREATE EXTENSION
> if people always should use the latest version. Maybe I'm missing something..

I think not that many people are using 9.1 in production already. Also
bear in mind that the mechanism is not made only for contrib, it makes
sense to ship in-house procedure code as an extension too.

Regards,
-- 
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr     PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support


Attachment: extension-default-full-version.v0.patch
Description: text/x-patch (17.7 KB)

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2012-02-21 22:14:26
Subject: Re: REASSIGN OWNED lacks support for FDWs
Previous:From: Dimitri FontaineDate: 2012-02-21 21:34:42
Subject: Re: Runtime SHAREDIR for testing CREATE EXTENSION

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group