Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: > Yes, it should be unnecessary given the search_path setup done by > execute_extension_script(). Also, I think that a relocatable > extension's script should not be subject to @extschema@ substitution, > no matter what.
Oh I'm just realizing that my reasoning predates the search_path strong guarantees at CREATE EXTENSION time. >> I think you'd be interested into this reworked SQL query. It should be >> providing exactly the script file you need as an upgrade from unpackaged. > > This seems overly complicated. I have a version of it that I'll publish > as soon as I've tested it on all the contrib modules ... Nice. I confess I worked out mine from my last patch where I still have the INTERNAL dependencies setup etc, so maybe that makes it more complex that it needs to be. Regards, -- Dimitri Fontaine http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
