Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 10:03:20 +0530
From: Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams@2ndQuadrant.com>
To: Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: dealing with extension dependencies that aren't quite
 'e'
Message-ID: <20160301043320.GA13286@toroid.org>
References: 
 <CAKFQuwYH=Z2EfahWez+qb=RCwCSoOtV7s75To+ysaKpeMwQkpw@mail.gmail.com>
 <18108.1452869354@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20160115170826.GA28307@toroid.org>
 <20160116144818.GA17401@toroid.org>
 <58C7A345-193B-4813-A7AA-4B78358313D6@gmail.com>
 <20160118053819.GA18576@toroid.org>
 <20160301012745.GA11489@toroid.org>
 <56D4F6B7.8010200@BlueTreble.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <56D4F6B7.8010200@BlueTreble.com>
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

At 2016-02-29 19:56:07 -0600, Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com wrote:
>
> I don't see why this would be limited to just functions. […] Am I
> missing something?

No, you are not missing anything. The specific problem I was trying to
solve involved a function, so I sketched out a solution for functions.
Once we have some consensus on whether that's an acceptable approach,
I'll extend the patch in whatever way we agree seems appropriate.

> Maybe the better way to handle this would be through ALTER EXTENSION?

That's what this (second) patch does.

> Given the audience for this, I think it'd probably be OK to just
> provide a function that does this, instead of DDL.

That seems like a promising idea. Can you suggest some possible usage?
Thanks.

-- Abhijit


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers