Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: Possible savepoint bug)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: Possible savepoint bug)
Date: 2005-12-28 16:41:25
Message-ID: 17797.1135788085@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
I wrote:
> So the mere act of defining a plperl function, even with
> check_function_bodies = false, is sufficient to send control through
> that bit of libperl code that does setlocale(LC_ALL, "").  Ugh.
> This is much worse than I thought.

It seems one ingredient in this is that the plperl function validator
fails to honor check_function_bodies, and hence is calling libperl
anyway.  I wonder if that explains the sudden rise in incidents in 8.1?

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Dmitry PanovDate: 2005-12-28 17:11:44
Subject: Re: WAL logs multiplexing?
Previous:From: Ian HardingDate: 2005-12-28 16:38:05
Subject: Re: WAL logs multiplexing?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group