Re: dealing with extension dependencies that aren't quite 'e'

On 2/29/16 7:27 PM, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
> 1. This adds the 'x'/DEPENDENCY_AUTO_EXTENSION type.
> 2. This adds an 'ALTER FUNCTION … ADD DEPENDENT FUNCTION …' command.
>
> I split up the two because we may want the new dependency type without
> going to the trouble of adding a new command. Maybe extension authors
> should just insert an 'x' row into pg_depend directly?

I don't see why this would be limited to just functions. I could
certainly see an extension that creates ease-of-use views that depend on
the extension, or tables that have triggers that .... Am I missing
something?

> I was inclined to implement it using ALTER FUNCTION, but AlterFunction()
> is focused on altering the pg_proc entry for a function, so the new code
> didn't fit. Ultimately, ExecAlterExtensionContentsStmt() was the closest
> match, so that's where I did it.

Maybe the better way to handle this would be through ALTER EXTENSION?

Given the audience for this, I think it'd probably be OK to just provide
a function that does this, instead of DDL. I'd be concerned about asking
users to do raw inserts though. pg_depends isn't the easiest thing to
grok so I suspect there'd be a lot of problems with that, resulting in
more raw DML to try and fix things, resulting in pg_depend getting
completely screwed up...
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com