From: | "Regina Obe" <lr(at)pcorp(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "'Gregory Stark \(as CFM\)'" <stark(dot)cfm(at)gmail(dot)com>, "'Sandro Santilli'" <strk(at)kbt(dot)io>, <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, "'Regina Obe'" <r(at)pcorp(dot)us> |
Subject: | RE: Ability to reference other extensions by schema in extension scripts |
Date: | 2023-03-10 22:52:40 |
Message-ID: | 000001d953a3$055ee4e0$101caea0$@pcorp.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> "Regina Obe" <lr(at)pcorp(dot)us> writes:
> >> requires = 'extfoo, extbar'
> >> no_relocate = 'extfoo'
>
> > So when no_relocate is specified, where would that live?
>
> In the control file.
>
> > Would I mark the extfoo as not relocatable on CREATE / ALTER of said
> > extension?
> > Or add an extra field to pg_extension
>
> We don't record dependent extensions in pg_extension now, so that doesn't
> seem like it would fit well. I was envisioning that ALTER EXTENSION SET
> SCHEMA would do something along the lines of
>
> (1) scrape the list of dependent extensions out of pg_depend
> (2) open and parse each of their control files
> (3) fail if any of their control files mentions the target one in
> no_relocate.
>
> Admittedly, this'd be a bit slow, but I doubt that ALTER EXTENSION SET
> SCHEMA is a performance bottleneck for anybody.
>
Okay I'll move ahead with this approach.
Thanks,
Regina
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2023-03-10 23:00:55 | Re: Add LZ4 compression in pg_dump |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2023-03-10 22:49:54 | Re: Sub-millisecond [autovacuum_]vacuum_cost_delay broken |