On Sat, Sep 26, 2020 at 10:11 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Julien Rouhaud writes:
> > So, apparently pg_available_extension_versions already had those
> > fields so all the required infrastructure was already there. I just
> > added the exact same fields to pg_available_extensions, see attached
> > pa
Julien Rouhaud writes:
> So, apparently pg_available_extension_versions already had those
> fields so all the required infrastructure was already there. I just
> added the exact same fields to pg_available_extensions, see attached
> patch.
The reason that pg_available_extensions has only the fie
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 2:51 PM Daniel Westermann (DWE)
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 10:58 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 03:28:45PM +, Daniel Westermann (DWE) wrote:
> >> > I was playing a bit with trusted extensions and wondered if there is
> >> > a reason
On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 10:58 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 03:28:45PM +, Daniel Westermann (DWE) wrote:
>> > I was playing a bit with trusted extensions and wondered if there is
>> > a reason that the "trusted" flag is not exposed in pg_available_extensions.
>> > I b
On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 10:58 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 03:28:45PM +, Daniel Westermann (DWE) wrote:
> > I was playing a bit with trusted extensions and wondered if there is
> > a reason that the "trusted" flag is not exposed in pg_available_extensions.
> > I believ
On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 03:28:45PM +, Daniel Westermann (DWE) wrote:
> I was playing a bit with trusted extensions and wondered if there is
> a reason that the "trusted" flag is not exposed in pg_available_extensions.
> I believe that information would be quite useful so one can easily
> iden
