| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tim Bunce <Tim(dot)Bunce(at)pobox(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(dot)wheeler(at)pgexperts(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: New PL/Perl failure with Safe 2.2x due to recursion (8.x & 9.0) |
| Date: | 2010-02-25 03:58:17 |
| Message-ID: | 20100.1267070297@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 20:37, Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 20:19, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> Seems entirely unacceptable.
>> I think we will see if we can get this fixed on the Safe/perl side then.
> BTW the trade off here is we revert back to sort { $a <=> $b } not
> working. That is if you could call it a trade off... The level of
> breaking is not really comparable :)
That's two unacceptable alternatives, you need to find a third one.
I think most people will have no trouble settling on "do not update
to Safe 2.2x" if you don't offer a better solution than these.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-02-25 04:22:57 | Re: PostgreSQL-9.0alpha: jade required? |
| Previous Message | Alex Hunsaker | 2010-02-25 03:48:27 | Re: New PL/Perl failure with Safe 2.2x due to recursion (8.x & 9.0) |