On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 2:51 PM Daniel Westermann (DWE) <daniel.westermann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 10:58 AM Michael Paquier <michael@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 03:28:45PM +0000, 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 > >> > identify extensions that can be installed as "normal" user. > >> > >> Adding the trusted flag makes sense for visibility. There is a bit > >> more that we could consider though? For example, what about > >> "relocatable" and "requires"? > > >+1, and also the schema (for non relocatable extensions). 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.
Attachment:
v1-pg_available_extensions_fields.diff
Description: Binary data
