Re: [PATCH] Support % wildcard in extension upgrade filenames
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] Support % wildcard in extension upgrade filenames |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 55512.1673304709@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] Support % wildcard in extension upgrade filenames (Regina Obe <r@pcorp.us>) |
Ответы |
RE: [PATCH] Support % wildcard in extension upgrade filenames
Re: [PATCH] Support % wildcard in extension upgrade filenames Re: [PATCH] Support % wildcard in extension upgrade filenames |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
I continue to think that this is a fundamentally bad idea. It creates all sorts of uncertainties about what is a valid update path and what is not. Restrictions like + Such wildcard update + scripts will only be used when no explicit path is found from + old to target version. are just band-aids to try to cover up the worst problems. Have you considered the idea of instead inventing a "\include" facility for extension scripts? Then, if you want to use one-monster-script to handle different upgrade cases, you still need one script file for each supported upgrade step, but those can be one-liners including the common script file. Plus, such a facility could be of use to people who want intermediate factorization solutions (that is, some sharing of code without buying all the way into one-monster-script). regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: