| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "Roberts, Jon" <Jon(dot)Roberts(at)asurion(dot)com>, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Including PL/PgSQL by default |
| Date: | 2008-02-22 17:50:10 |
| Message-ID: | 6019.1203702610@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Not really sure what to think here. On the one hand I agree that since
> the dbowner can load it at their leisure its cool. On the other hand I
> wonder why we continue to add extra unnecessary steps to our life. Yes,
> it is a simple step but it is one that doesn't need to be taken, so why
> are we making people expend the calories on it?
As Andrew pointed out, a preinstalled language will be much harder for
db owners to manage. And I think it would make doing database
dump/restore as a non-superuser virtually impossible. It's not going
to be all a bed of roses if we do that.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Richard Huxton | 2008-02-22 17:53:29 | Re: Full-text search default vs specified configuration |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2008-02-22 17:46:51 | Re: 8.3 / 8.2.6 restore comparison |