Re: Dumping an Extension's Script

On 2012-12-05 23:28:45 +0100, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > What happens on a normal pg_dump of the complete database?  For
> > extensions that were installed using strings instead of files, do I get
> > a string back?  Because if not, the restore is clearly going to fail
> > anyway.
>
> The argument here is that the user would then have packaged its
> extension as files in the meantime. If not, that's operational error. A
> backup you didn't restore successfully isn't a backup anyway.

Uh. Wait. What? If that argument is valid, we don't need anything but
file based extensions.

> > I mean, clearly the user doesn't want to list the extensions, figure
> > which ones were installed by strings, and then do pg_dump
> > --extension-script on them.
>
> The idea is that the user did install the extensions that came by
> strings. Last year the consensus was clearly for pg_dump not to
> distinguish in between file based and string based extensions that are
> exactly the same thing once installed in a database. That's the current
> design.

I don't find that argument convincing in the slightest. Could I perhaps
convince you to dig up a reference? I would be interested in the
arguments for that design back then.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--Andres Freund                       http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services