Re: shoud be get_extension_schema visible?

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: shoud be get_extension_schema visible?
Date: 2023-03-06 07:44:59
Message-ID: ZAWZ+6oc8Sp1lyWQ@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 08:34:49AM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> Note for other reviewers / committers: this is a something actually already
>> wanted for 3rd party code. As an example, here's Pavel's code in
>> plpgsql_check
>> extension that internally has to duplicate this function (and deal with
>> compatibility):
>> https://github.com/okbob/plpgsql_check/blob/master/src/catalog.c#L205

I can see why you'd want that, so OK from here to provide this routine
for external consumption. Let's first wait a bit and see if others
have any kind of objections or comments.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2023-03-06 07:51:46 Re: add PROCESS_MAIN to VACUUM
Previous Message Pavel Luzanov 2023-03-06 07:43:22 Re: psql: Add role's membership options to the \du+ command