Re: Extensions versus pg_upgrade

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Extensions versus pg_upgrade
Date: 2011-02-10 16:33:31
Message-ID: 8787.1297355611@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> Actually, it occurs to me that the need for ALTER EXTENSION DROP could
>> be upon us sooner than we think. The cases where an extension upgrade
>> script would need that are
>> (1) you want to remove some deprecated piece of the extension's API;
>> (2) you want to remove some no-longer-needed internal function.
>> Without ALTER EXTENSION DROP it's flat out impossible to do either.

> What if you just DROP FUNCTION in the upgrade script?

That would be rejected because you're not allowed to drop an individual
member object of an extension. (And no, I don't want to have a kluge in
dependency.c that makes that test work differently when
creating_extension.)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-02-10 16:41:50 Re: Adding new variables into GUC
Previous Message Dimitri Fontaine 2011-02-10 15:59:23 Re: Extensions versus pg_upgrade