Re: View to get all the extension control file details

On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 3:18 PM Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <
horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:

> Hello.
>
> At Mon, 17 Sep 2018 16:49:41 +1000, Haribabu Kommi <
> kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote in
> <CAJrrPGf0LZEEhTLCpjRm0Hg0K_37BOY4RUPe7Lrdk0z=ke-6zQ(at)mail(dot)gmail(dot)com>
> > Hi Hackers,
> >
> > Currently PostgreSQL provides following views to get the extension
> specific
> > details
> >
> > pg_available_extensions - Name, default_version, installed_version,
> comment
> >
> > pg_available_extension_versions - Name, version, installed, superuser,
> > relocatable, schema, requires, comment
> >
> > But these misses the "directory", "module_pathname" and "encoding"
> > extension specific informations and these are not available even with
> > extension specific functions also. There are some extension that differs
> in
> > extension name to library name. The pgpool_recovery extension library
> name
> > is pgpool-recovery.so, '_' to '-'. While we are developing some tool on
> top
> > of PostgreSQL, we found out this problem and it can be solved easily if
> the
> > server expose the details that i have and got it from the extension
> control
> > file.
>
> Nowadays we are going to provide views for such files. Howerer
> I'm not a fan of checking extension packaging using such views,

Thanks for your opinion.
As we are in the process of developing a tool to find out the details
of the extensions automatically, in that case, it will be helpful if any
view is available.

> I
> agree that it's good to have at least a function/view that shows
> all available attributes of extensions. Is there no other items
> not in controlfiles?
>

I listed all the members of the ExtensionControlFile structure. I don't
find anything else is required.

> > Any opinion in adding a new view like "pg_available_extension_details" to
> > display all extension control file columns? or Adding them to the
> existing
> > view is good?
>
> I felt it's a bit too noisy at first but pg_settings is doing
> something like. So +1 to extend the existing
> pg_available_extensions view from me from the viewpoint of
> consistency with other views of the similar objective.
>

OK, thanks for your view. Will do accordingly.

Regards,
Haribabu Kommi
Fujitsu Australia