Re: Why not install pgstattuple by default?

From: Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com>, Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(dot)berkus(at)pgexperts(dot)com>, postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Why not install pgstattuple by default?
Date: 2011-05-08 01:47:55
Message-ID: 4DC5F64B.4010103@2ndQuadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 05/06/2011 04:06 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> FWIW, I did move pg_config from -devel to the "main" (really client)
> postgresql package in Fedora, as of 9.0. That will ensure it's present
> in either client or server installations. Eventually that packaging
> will reach RHEL ...
>

We should make sure that the PGDG packages adopt that for 9.1 then, so
it starts catching on more. Unless Devrim changed to catch up since I
last installed an RPM set, in that 9.0 it's still in the same place:

$ rpm -qf /usr/pgsql-9.0/bin/pg_config
postgresql90-devel-9.0.2-2PGDG.rhel5

While Peter's question about whether it's really all that useful is
reasonable, I'd at least like to get a better error message when you
don't have everything needed to compile extensions. I think the
shortest path to that is making pg_config more likely to be installed,
then to check whether the file "pg_config --pgxs" references exists.
I'll see if I can turn that idea into an actual change to propose.

--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.us

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2011-05-08 03:37:07 Re: postgresql.conf error checking strategy
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2011-05-08 00:20:23 Re: pg_upgrade's bindir options could be optional