| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Tim Bunce <Tim(dot)Bunce(at)pobox(dot)com>, "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: First feature patch for plperl - draft [PATCH] |
| Date: | 2009-12-05 17:17:27 |
| Message-ID: | 18338.1260033447@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> If we turn Tim's proposal down, I suspect someone will create a fork of
> plperl that allows it anyway - it's not like it needs anything changed
> elsewhere in the backend - it would be a drop-in replacement, pretty much.
The question is not about whether we think it's useful; the question
is about whether it's safe.
> I think if we do this the on_perl_init setting should probably be
> PGC_POSTMASTER, which would remove any issue about it changing
> underneath us.
Yes, if the main intended usage is in combination with preloading perl
at postmaster start, it would be pointless to imagine that PGC_SIGHUP
is useful anyway.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2009-12-05 17:24:55 | Re: Hot standby, misc issues |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2009-12-05 17:03:36 | Re: First feature patch for plperl - draft [PATCH] |