| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Attention PL authors: want to be listed in template table? |
| Date: | 2005-09-06 17:23:44 |
| Message-ID: | 200509061923.45671.peter_e@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> There is deliberately not a way to override (other than using a
> different name for the PL). One of the points of this facility is to
> fix up broken PL definitions being imported from old dump files, so
> believing what the CREATE LANGUAGE command says is exactly what we
> don't want.
I don't doubt that, but I just have a stomach ache with this entire
notion of having a hard-coded exception list of the sort "if the user
requires this, do this instead". Why don't we just put all PLs that we
know of into pg_language to begin with, revoke the permissions, and
just let CREATE LANGUAGE fail when the dump is restored? (The dump
should restore the permissions, shouldn't it?) At least that would let
you alter the "template" using existing means.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2005-09-06 17:24:34 | Re: Attention PL authors: want to be listed in template table? |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2005-09-06 17:20:53 | Re: Attention PL authors: want to be listed in template |