Re: [PATCH] postgres_fdw extension support

Paul Ramsey <pramsey(at)cleverelephant(dot)ca> writes:
> Folks are going to be OK w/ me dropping in new syscache entries so support my niche little feature?

No, mainly because it adds overhead without fixing your problem. It's not
correct to suppose that a syscache on pg_extension would reliably report
anything; consider ALTER EXTENSION ADD/DROP, which does not touch the
pg_extension row.

I'm inclined to think that it's not really necessary to worry about
invalidating a per-connection cache of "is this function safe to ship"
determinations. Neither CREATE EXTENSION nor DROP EXTENSION pose any
hazard, nor would ALTER EXTENSION UPGRADE for typical scenarios (which
would only include adding new functions that weren't there before, so
they weren't in your cache anyway).

Anybody who's screwing around with extension membership on-the-fly is
unlikely to expect the system to redetermine ship-ability for active FDW
connections anyway. If you could do that fully correctly for not a lot of
additional cost, sure; but really anything like this is only going to
take you from 99% to 99.01% coverage of real cases. Doesn't seem worth
the trouble.

regards, tom lane