On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 11:13:57PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > That's what I thought too, but I see a schema file in pg_extensions:
>
> Read the manual.
>
> > Should we hard-code a pg_catalog plpgsql to be skipped in pg_dump?
>
> No, I don't think so.
>
> The real issue here is that we don't have a notion of a "built-in
> extension". I think this was specifically debated back when we
> extension-ified plpgsql, though I don't recall details of why
> we ended up not doing that. Maybe the idea was that you could
> drop and then re-add plpgsql? Anyway, I think this is not such
> a simple issue and a one-line hack in pg_dump is not likely to
> improve matters.
OK, I added a TODO:
Prevent PL/pgSQL comment from throwing an error in a
non-superuser restore
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
