Re: [HACKERS] Installing PL/pgSQL by default - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Installing PL/pgSQL by default
Date
Msg-id 24775.1259940550@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Installing PL/pgSQL by default  (Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Installing PL/pgSQL by default  (Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine@hi-media.com>)
List pgsql-general
Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk> writes:
> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
>  Tom> Hm, I think that's only a problem if we define it to be a
>  Tom> problem, and I'm not sure it's necessary to do so.

> The complaint is that if plpgsql is installed by default, then it will
> be owned by postgres rather than by the db owner, who will then not be
> able to drop it or use grant/revoke on it.

Right, just like every other thing that's pre-installed.  If a
particular installation wishes to let individual DB owners control this,
the superuser can drop plpgsql from template1.  It's not apparent to me
why we need to allow non-superusers to override the project's decisions
about what should be installed by default.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Catastrophic changes to PostgreSQL 8.4
Next
From: Dave Page
Date:
Subject: PostgreSQL Release Support Policy