Re: contrib/pgcrypto functions not IMMUTABLE? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Neil Conway
Subject Re: contrib/pgcrypto functions not IMMUTABLE?
Date
Msg-id 42C8A022.1080901@samurai.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: contrib/pgcrypto functions not IMMUTABLE?  (Michael Fuhr <mike@fuhr.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
Michael Fuhr wrote:
> But if they restore a dump made with pg_dump or pg_dumpall, they'll
> get the old catalog entries sans STRICT, no?  People might rebuild
> the module when they upgrade, but they might not think to drop and
> recreate the functions since the definitions are already in the
> dump.

I think it is asking for trouble in general to use the DDL from one 
version of pgcrypto with a different version of the pgcrypto 
implementation. However, you're right that people are inevitably going 
to do this, so I suppose we need to keep the checks. Perhaps it would be 
worth adding something to the installation documentation suggesting that 
people take care when installing new versions of contrib/ packages and 
the like without updating the DDL for those packages.

-Neil


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Fuhr
Date:
Subject: Re: contrib/pgcrypto functions not IMMUTABLE?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: HEAD doesn't cope with libraries in non-default locations