Re: getpid() function

From: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Karel Zak <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: getpid() function
Date: 2002-08-02 04:48:34
Message-ID: 3D4A0F22.3C3B5443@fourpalms.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

...
> Perhaps a more relevant question is why are we cluttering the namespace
> with any such function at all? What's the use case for it? We've
> gotten along fine without one so far, and I don't really think that we
> *ought* to be exposing random bits of internal implementation details
> at the SQL level.

Actually, I was wondering the same thing, maybe for a different reason.
Exposing the backend internals could have security implications (though
don't make me concoct a scenario to prove it ;)

Although it might have some usefulness for debugging, I think it should
not be an "installed by default" feature, so istm would be a great
candidate for a contrib/ function or library. If someone needs it, it is
almost immediately available.

- Thomas

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Zeb Fropiaz 2002-08-02 04:56:20 Recursion in SQL
Previous Message Ron Harter 2002-08-02 04:28:49 Temporal Database

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-08-02 04:49:18 Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-08-02 04:38:56 Re: Trimming the Fat, Part Deux ...