| From: | Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Subject: | Re: dealing with extension dependencies that aren't quite 'e' |
| Date: | 2016-04-05 02:25:30 |
| Message-ID: | 20160405022530.GA3078@toroid.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
At 2016-04-04 18:55:03 -0300, alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com wrote:
>
> At this point I think we're missing user-level docs for the additional
> clause in each ALTER command.
Thanks for having a look. Now that you're happy with the grammar, I'll
write the remaining docs and resubmit the patch later today.
> Do you have any ideas on how this would appear in regression tests?
No specific ideas.
At a high level, I think we should install an empty extension, create
one of each kind of object, alter them to depend on the extension, check
that pg_depend has the right 'x' rows, then drop the extension and make
sure the objects have gone away.
Does that sound reasonable? Suggestions welcome.
-- Abhijit
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Rowley | 2016-04-05 02:26:08 | Re: oversight in parallel aggregate |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2016-04-05 02:15:20 | Re: snapshot too old, configured by time |