Re: modules
От | Martijn van Oosterhout |
---|---|
Тема | Re: modules |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20080404090601.GA18988@svana.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: modules ("Tom Dunstan" <pgsql@tomd.cc>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 02:23:31PM +0530, Tom Dunstan wrote: > Right. Which is why some of us have been suggesting a model where all > modules currently in contrib are installed by default, but not enabled > until a database owner actually issues some sort of "Install module > foo" or whatever it looks like. Reading the message that starts this thread I note the problem is underspecified. We have three properties of the provider: a. You have superuser priveledges on your database b. You have a shell where you can compile programs c. Your provider has instlled the postgresql-contrib package With either a&b or a&c you're home. However, without a you're stuffed. What I want to know is: does the situation where you have only c but not b or a happen often? Because that we *can* do something about. Or are we dealing primarily with providers where you have none of the above? Have a nice day, -- Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> http://svana.org/kleptog/ > Please line up in a tree and maintain the heap invariant while > boarding. Thank you for flying nlogn airlines.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: