Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndQuadrant.fr> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
>> one I'd been thinking about a bit was OIDs of modules this one depends
>> on. The current design doesn't cope very well with modules that depend
>> on other ones.
> Or even at all. I guess here "modules" is referring to shared object
> libraries, right? Or are you already thinking about extension that
> depend on other extensions, like earthdistance depends on cube?
Sorry, I meant module == extension. If it's not intended that we try to
support dependent extensions yet, I'd be fine with leaving that for 9.2.
However, if earthdistance already has such a dependency, maybe we can't
put that issue off.
regards, tom lane