Horton
Menu

Re: [HACKERS] Installing PL/pgSQL by default

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

View thread
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>
Cc: PGSQL Mailing List <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>, Thom Brown <thombrown@gmail.com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, Craig Ringer <craig@postnewspapers.com.au>
Date: 2009-12-04T15:29:10Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers, pgsql-general 
Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk> writes:
> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
>  Tom> Hm, I think that's only a problem if we define it to be a
>  Tom> problem, and I'm not sure it's necessary to do so.

> The complaint is that if plpgsql is installed by default, then it will
> be owned by postgres rather than by the db owner, who will then not be
> able to drop it or use grant/revoke on it.

Right, just like every other thing that's pre-installed.  If a
particular installation wishes to let individual DB owners control this,
the superuser can drop plpgsql from template1.  It's not apparent to me
why we need to allow non-superusers to override the project's decisions
about what should be installed by default.

			regards, tom lane