Re: ALTER EXTENSION UPGRADE, v3
От | Dimitri Fontaine |
---|---|
Тема | Re: ALTER EXTENSION UPGRADE, v3 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 87vd11qzdx.fsf@hi-media-techno.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: ALTER EXTENSION UPGRADE, v3 (Anssi Kääriäinen <anssi.kaariainen@thl.fi>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Anssi Kääriäinen <anssi.kaariainen@thl.fi> writes: > upgrade_from_2.0.sql contents: > alter table foobar add column id3 integer; > pg_execute_extension_file('upgrade_from_3.0.sql'); > > ... > > So, when creating a new version you would need to update the main .sql file, > create a new upgrade file, and alter the upgrade_from_previous_version.sql > to include the new upgrade file. This should be relatively easy to > maintain. Also, this would give you the freedom to not chain the files when > that is not appropriate. Again, why not, I think I can see how this would work out. What I don't see is what is the gain compared to preparing the right files at make time and only shipping "autonomous" files. I very much prefer to handle a set of source SQL files and some cat a b c > ship.sql rules rather than ship loads of files that all depends on each other. > By the way, I saw that the character '.' is not allowed in the xxx part of > upgrade_from_xxx and this is not documented in the patch. What can be in the > xxx part, and is this documented somewhere else? It has to be a valid configuration variable name, as any other GUC, and it's not a placeholder (only those can contain dots). We're using the same parser as for postgresql.conf and recovery.conf here. Not sure where that is documented, though. Regards, -- Dimitri Fontaine http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: