Re: First feature patch for plperl - draft [PATCH]

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
Cc: Tim Bunce <Tim(dot)Bunce(at)pobox(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: First feature patch for plperl - draft [PATCH]
Date: 2009-12-04 18:51:00
Message-ID: 28618.1259952660@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"David E. Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> writes:
> On Dec 4, 2009, at 10:36 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I vote a big no on this.

> That's fine. It's relatively simple for an admin to create a Perl module that does everything she wants, call it PGInit or something, and then just make the GUC:

> plperl.on_perl_init = 'use PGInit;'

No, you missed the point: I'm objecting to having any such thing as
plperl.on_perl_init, full stop.

Aside from the points I already made, it's not even well defined.
What is to happen if the admin changes the value when the system
is already up?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff 2009-12-04 18:51:53 Re: First feature patch for plperl - draft [PATCH]
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2009-12-04 18:44:57 Re: First feature patch for plperl - draft [PATCH]