Re: Dumping an Extension's Script

On 20.11.2012 21:25, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 19 November 2012 16:25, Robert Haas<robertmhaas@gmail.com>  wrote:
>
>> Beyond that, I think much of the appeal of the extension feature is
>> that it dumps as "CREATE EXTENSION hstore;" and nothing more.  That
>> allows you to migrate a dump between systems with different but
>> compatible versions of the hstore and have things work as intended.
>> I'm not opposed to the idea of being able to make extensions without
>> files on disk work ... but I consider it a niche use case; the
>> behavior we have right now works well for me and hopefully for others
>> most of the time.
>
> Distributing software should only happen by files?
>
> So why does Stackbuilder exist on the Windows binary?
>
> Why does yum exist? What's wrong with ftp huh?
>
> Why does CPAN?
>
> I've a feeling this case might be a sensible way forwards, not a niche at all.

I have to join Robert in scratching my head over this. I don't 
understand what the use case is. Can you explain? I don't understand the 
comparison with stackbuilder, yum, ftp and CPAN. CPAN seems close to 
pgxn, but what does that have to do with this patch?

On 20.11.2012 11:08, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:> Apparently I'm not the only one doing extensions without anything to>
compile,all SQL:>>     http://keithf4.com/extension_tips_3
 

No doubt about that. I'm sure extensions written in pure SQL or PL/pgSQL 
are very common. But what does that have to do with this patch?

- Heikki