Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2016 07:55:30 +0530
From: Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams@2ndQuadrant.com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
	pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org,
	Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru>
Subject: Re: dealing with extension dependencies that aren't quite 'e'
Message-ID: <20160405022530.GA3078@toroid.org>
References: <20160401123136.GA6379@toroid.org>
 <20160404215503.GA237481@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160404215503.GA237481@alvherre.pgsql>
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

At 2016-04-04 18:55:03 -0300, alvherre@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
>
> At this point I think we're missing user-level docs for the additional
> clause in each ALTER command.

Thanks for having a look. Now that you're happy with the grammar, I'll
write the remaining docs and resubmit the patch later today.

> Do you have any ideas on how this would appear in regression tests?

No specific ideas.

At a high level, I think we should install an empty extension, create
one of each kind of object, alter them to depend on the extension, check
that pg_depend has the right 'x' rows, then drop the extension and make
sure the objects have gone away.

Does that sound reasonable? Suggestions welcome.

-- Abhijit


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