Re: A different approach to extension NO USER DATA feature

Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> one I'd been thinking about a bit was OIDs of modules this one depends
>> on. The current design doesn't cope very well with modules that depend
>> on other ones.

> Or even at all. I guess here "modules" is referring to shared object
> libraries, right? Or are you already thinking about extension that
> depend on other extensions, like earthdistance depends on cube?

Sorry, I meant module == extension. If it's not intended that we try to
support dependent extensions yet, I'd be fine with leaving that for 9.2.
However, if earthdistance already has such a dependency, maybe we can't
put that issue off.

regards, tom lane