Hello.
At Mon, 17 Sep 2018 16:49:41 +1000, Haribabu Kommi <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com> wrote in
<CAJrrPGf0LZEEhTLCpjRm0Hg0K_37BOY4RUPe7Lrdk0z=ke-6zQ@mail.gmail.com>
> Hi Hackers,
>
> Currently PostgreSQL provides following views to get the extension specific
> details
>
> pg_available_extensions - Name, default_version, installed_version, comment
>
> pg_available_extension_versions - Name, version, installed, superuser,
> relocatable, schema, requires, comment
>
> But these misses the "directory", "module_pathname" and "encoding"
> extension specific informations and these are not available even with
> extension specific functions also. There are some extension that differs in
> extension name to library name. The pgpool_recovery extension library name
> is pgpool-recovery.so, '_' to '-'. While we are developing some tool on top
> of PostgreSQL, we found out this problem and it can be solved easily if the
> server expose the details that i have and got it from the extension control
> file.
Nowadays we are going to provide views for such files. Howerer
I'm not a fan of checking extension packaging using such views, I
agree that it's good to have at least a function/view that shows
all available attributes of extensions. Is there no other items
not in controlfiles?
> Any opinion in adding a new view like "pg_available_extension_details" to
> display all extension control file columns? or Adding them to the existing
> view is good?
I felt it's a bit too noisy at first but pg_settings is doing
something like. So +1 to extend the existing
pg_available_extensions view from me from the viewpoint of
consistency with other views of the similar objective.
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center