Re: [HACKERS] PlPython

Tom Lane wrote:
> elein <elein(at)varlena(dot)com> writes:
> > For 7.4 (which I expect is the patch's target) it might be
> > best to make both names point to the same thing with a
> > clear release note that says that they are the same thing
> > and that plpython[u] is now untrusted.
>
> I don't know any way to actually do that, though. If we put two entries
> in pg_language then functions created in plpython will stay associated
> with that entry. That'd probably be the worst of all possible worlds,
> since a person looking at pg_language would quite reasonably assume that
> plpython was still trusted and the untrusted plpythonu was just an
> addition. (Especially if he happened to know that such an addition was
> planned long ago.) You could shoot yourself in the foot pretty badly
> with such a misunderstanding :-(
>
> The behavior that I think would be most useful would be to automatically
> transpose CREATE FUNCTION ... LANGUAGE "plpython" into CREATE FUNCTION
> ... LANGUAGE "plpythonu". Which we could do with an ugly hack in CREATE
> FUNCTION (ugly, but no worse than things we've done to index opclass
> names, for example). But it could be too confusing.

You mean in gram.y? Yes, I think that is our only choice.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073