Re: Dumping an Extension's Script

From: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Dumping an Extension's Script
Date: 2012-12-05 20:49:11
Message-ID: m2sj7kgr7c.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> +1. Certainly a pg_dump patch's thread is not the place to propose it.

Sure. Sorry about that, the goal of that previous message was to let
people come to understand better my whole vision of what is an
Extension, a contrib, and where we are what I wanted us to build.

I refined those ideas in another email though, so you can safely ignore
this sub-thread. I'll get back to the question of storing .so in a per
database location with an opt-in GUC later, when appropriate.

Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2012-12-05 21:02:22 Re: Dumping an Extension's Script
Previous Message Tom Lane 2012-12-05 20:46:04 Re: why can't plpgsql return a row-expression?