Received: from makus.postgresql.org (makus.postgresql.org [98.129.198.125]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61BB24A2A38 for ; Sat, 25 Feb 2012 11:32:01 -0400 (AST) Received: from sd-17937.dedibox.fr ([88.191.100.74]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1S1JbI-0003ol-IE for pgsql-admin@postgresql.org; Sat, 25 Feb 2012 15:31:59 +0000 Received: from [192.168.10.3] (AMontsouris-552-1-157-241.w86-212.abo.wanadoo.fr [86.212.80.241]) by sd-17937.dedibox.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 522A73B92D; Sat, 25 Feb 2012 16:31:43 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <1330183903.2593.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> Subject: Re: Problems with pg_restore (plpgsql already exists) From: Guillaume Lelarge To: Brian Weaver Cc: "pgsql-admin@postgresql.org" Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2012 16:31:43 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <4F4820C8.2000703@iii.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3 (3.2.3-1.fc16) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Archive-Number: 201202/103 X-Sequence-Number: 39163 On Fri, 2012-02-24 at 22:12 -0500, Brian Weaver wrote: > So when did the installation of PL/PgSQL into all databases become standard > operating procedure? It wasn't standard (or at least it didn't choke) on > the installation of versions 8.3 and 8.4 that I have used on CentOS 5. > > Seems like a fairly substantial change. Did I miss it in the release notes? > Since 9.0, it's the third item in the overview list of the release notes http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/release-9-0.html. -- Guillaume http://blog.guillaume.lelarge.info http://www.dalibo.com