Re: [GENERAL] Dropping extensions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [GENERAL] Dropping extensions
Date
Msg-id 2961.1311433732@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: [GENERAL] Dropping extensions
Re: [GENERAL] Dropping extensions
List pgsql-hackers
Marc Munro <marc@bloodnok.com> writes:
> In postgres 9.1 I have created 2 extensions, veil and veil_demo.  When I
> install veil, it creates a default (not very useful) version of a
> function: veil_init().

> When I create veil_demo, it replaces this version of the function with
> it's own (useful) version.

> If I drop the extension veil_demo, I am left with the veil_demo version
> of veil_init().

> Is this a feature or a bug?  Is there a work-around?

Hmm.  I don't think we have any code in there to prohibit the same
object from being made a member of two different extensions ... but this
example suggests that maybe we had better check that.

In general, though, it is not intended that extension creation scripts
use CREATE OR REPLACE, which I gather you must be doing.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Questions and experiences writing a Foreign Data Wrapper
Next
From: Dimitri Fontaine
Date:
Subject: Re: proposal: a validator for configuration files