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

Re: [GENERAL] Dropping extensions

From: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: marc(at)bloodnok(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Dropping extensions
Date: 2011-07-30 20:46:46
Message-ID: m2fwln1op5.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-generalpgsql-hackers
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Hmm.  I don't think we have any code in there to prohibit the same
> object from being made a member of two different extensions ... but this
> example suggests that maybe we had better check that.

I see you did take care of that, thank you!

  http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=988cccc620dd8c16d77f88ede167b22056176324

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

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Dean RasheedDate: 2011-07-30 22:40:46
Subject: Re: cataloguing NOT NULL constraints
Previous:From: Dave PageDate: 2011-07-30 19:32:03
Subject: Re: libedit memory stomp is apparently fixed in OS X Lion

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Tomas VondraDate: 2011-07-30 21:58:42
Subject: Re: Statistics about Streaming Replication deployments in production
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2011-07-30 20:45:32
Subject: Re: ERROR: could not read block 4707 of relation 1663/16384/16564: Success

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