| From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| 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 18:42:24 |
| Message-ID: | D52625E7-BD7A-4D93-8FC3-EAED7E822F47@kineticode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Dec 4, 2009, at 10:36 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Are multiline GUCs allowed in the postgresql.conf file?
>
> I don't think so. In any case this seems like an extreme abuse of the
> concept of a GUC, as well as being a solution in search of a problem,
> as well as being something that should absolutely not ever happen inside
> the postmaster process for both reliability and security reasons.
> 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;'
Best,
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2009-12-04 18:44:57 | Re: First feature patch for plperl - draft [PATCH] |
| Previous Message | Dean Rasheed | 2009-12-04 18:42:00 | CVS HEAD: Error accessing system column from plpgsql trigger function |