No, that was defined in the database through pg_dump, edit the path, the
loading the pg_dump using psql. For each time the database has been
upgraded.
We started using Postgres in 2000 and even plpgsql had to be created as a
language back then, there was no creation by default. Evidently the
documentation indicated that the path to the shared library had to be
declared because I don't remember any example showing $library.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:bruce@momjian.us]
Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 10:30 PM
To: Tom Lane
Cc: David Platt; pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #5642: pg_upgrade does not handle shared libraries
for language handlers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > David Platt wrote:
> >> The following definition is my database:
> >>
> >> CREATE FUNCTION plpgsql_call_handler() RETURNS language_handler
> >> LANGUAGE c
> >> AS '/opt/postgres/8.4.1/lib/plpgsql', 'plpgsql_call_handler';
> >>
> >> The file /opt/postgres/9.rc1/lib/plpgsql.o exists but the pg_upgrade
run
> >> fails on an error loading /opt/postgres/8.4.1/lib/plpgsql.o.
>
> > What is the error? What old version of PG are you migrating from?
>
> Well, it's obviously going to fail, because it will try to load an 8.4
> version of plpgsql.so into 9.0. The same would happen if you tried to
> pg_dump and reload --- it's by no means the fault of pg_upgrade.
>
> IMO this is just pilot error. The call handler should never have been
> declared like that, precisely because the definition will not port to
> other releases or even other installation locations. The right way for
> the definition to look like is
>
> ... AS '$libdir/plpgsql'
>
> or perhaps even just
>
> ... AS 'plpgsql'
>
> if you'd like to rely on the dynamic_library_path setting.
>
> I suspect David thinks that pg_upgrade should try to edit the library
> path name, but IMO that would be seriously dangerous, as well as not
> necessary if reasonable practices have been followed.
I am confused how it got defined that way? Who would be defining their
own plpgsql handler? I am concerned there is some packaging that is
impoperly defining it.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
