> On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 11:24:19PM -0500, Regina Obe wrote:
>
> > Here is first version of my patch using the @extschema:extensionname@
> > syntax you proposed.
> >
> > This patch includes:
> > 1) Changes to replace references of @extschema:extensionname@ with the
> > schema of the required extension
> > 2) Documentation for the feature
> > 3) Tests for the feature.
> >
> > There is one issue I thought about that is not addressed by this.
> >
> > If an extension is required by another extension and that required
> > extension schema is referenced in the extension scripts using the
> > @extschema:extensionname@ syntax, then ideally we should prevent the
> > required extension from being relocatable. This would prevent a user
> > from accidentally moving the required extension, thus breaking the
> > dependent extensions.
> >
> > I didn't add that feature cause I wasn't sure if it was overstepping
> > the bounds of what should be done, or if we leave it up to the user to
> > just know better.
>
> An alternative would be to forbid using @extschema:extensionname@ to
> reference relocatable extensions. DBA can toggle relocatability of an
extension
> to allow it to be referenced.
>
> --strk;
That would be hard to do in a DbaaS setup and not many users know they can
fiddle with extension control files.
Plus those would get overwritten with upgrades.
In my case for example I have postgis_tiger_geocoder that relies on both
postgis and fuzzystrmatch.
I'd rather not have to explain to users how to fiddle with the
fuzzystrmatch.control file to make it not relocatable.
But I don't think anyone would mind if it's forced after install because
it's a rare thing for people to be moving extensions to different schemas
after install.
Thanks,
Regina
