Re: Dumping an Extension's Script

Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndquadrant.fr>

From: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndQuadrant.fr>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2012-12-05T22:28:45Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> What happens on a normal pg_dump of the complete database?  For
> extensions that were installed using strings instead of files, do I get
> a string back?  Because if not, the restore is clearly going to fail
> anyway.

The argument here is that the user would then have packaged its
extension as files in the meantime. If not, that's operational error. A
backup you didn't restore successfully isn't a backup anyway.

> I mean, clearly the user doesn't want to list the extensions, figure
> which ones were installed by strings, and then do pg_dump
> --extension-script on them.

The idea is that the user did install the extensions that came by
strings. Last year the consensus was clearly for pg_dump not to
distinguish in between file based and string based extensions that are
exactly the same thing once installed in a database. That's the current
design.

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