Re: Final /contrib cleanup -- yes/no?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Final /contrib cleanup -- yes/no? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 16137.1226010249@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Final /contrib cleanup -- yes/no? (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Final /contrib cleanup -- yes/no?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes: > The way the SQL scripts currently work, there is no way to manage what > schema the contrib modules get built in *except* to edit the scripts. Right, that's the intended and documented way to do it. > In fact, because of the SET statements, a DBA who might *reasonably* > expect that setting PGOPTIONS would allow him to determine that will be > unpleasantly surprised when the module ends up in "public" anyway. I don't see that this is a reasonable expectation; it has never worked in any previous release, and the documentation explicitly says to do the other. Also, at least some of the proposed forms of a module facility would have the effect of overriding any such approach anyhow. Again, I'm not for whacking around the procedures for dealing with contrib each time we make a release. We should change it once when we have a shot at getting it right. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: