Re: pg_amcheck option to install extension - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: pg_amcheck option to install extension
Date
Msg-id 3d5262d1-a86d-eab0-1fcb-e98c1c735f19@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_amcheck option to install extension  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>)
Responses Re: pg_amcheck option to install extension
Re: pg_amcheck option to install extension
List pgsql-hackers
On 4/18/21 7:32 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2021-Apr-18, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>> On 4/17/21 3:43 PM, Mark Dilger wrote:
>>> I'd also like your impressions on whether we're likely to move
>>> contrib/amcheck into core anytime soon.  If so, is it worth adding
>>> an option that we'll soon need to deprecate?
>> I think if it stays as an extension it will stay in contrib. But it sure
>> feels very odd to have a core bin program that relies on a contrib
>> extension. It seems one or the other is misplaced.
> I've proposed in the past that we should have a way to provide
> extensions other than contrib -- specifically src/extensions/ -- and
> then have those extensions installed together with the rest of core.
> Then it would be perfectly legitimate to have src/bin/pg_amcheck that
> depending that extension.  I agree that the current situation is not
> great.
>


OK, so let's fix it. If amcheck is going to stay in contrib then ISTM
pg_amcheck should move there. I can organize that if there's agreement.
Or else let's move amcheck as Alvaro suggests.


cheers


andrew


--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: Windows default locale vs initdb
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: multi-install PostgresNode fails with older postgres versions