Re: Bug #6593, extensions, and proposed new patch policy - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dimitri Fontaine
Subject Re: Bug #6593, extensions, and proposed new patch policy
Date
Msg-id m2ipgvh1k9.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Bug #6593, extensions, and proposed new patch policy  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
> Remember that we're talking about REASSIGN OWNED here, which will
> automatically reassign not only the extension itself, but also the
> contained objects.  There is no danger that we will end up with an
> inconsistent installation.  Also, if the objects in the extension have
> been manually given to someone else, they will stay owned by that other
> user, precisely because the code as written does not recurse.

Oh, right, I forgot the scope of the command. Given those bits of missed
context, +1 from me here. Sorry about missing that in my previous email.

Regards,
-- 
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr     PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Bug #6593, extensions, and proposed new patch policy
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Plan stability versus near-exact ties in cost estimates