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

Re: New PL/Perl failure with Safe 2.2x due to recursion (8.x & 9.0)

From: Tim Bunce <Tim(dot)Bunce(at)pobox(dot)com>
To: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(dot)wheeler(at)pgexperts(dot)com>
Cc: Tim Bunce <Tim(dot)Bunce(at)pobox(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: New PL/Perl failure with Safe 2.2x due to recursion (8.x & 9.0)
Date: 2010-02-25 20:58:14
Message-ID: 20100225205814.GO1018@timac.local (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 10:04:44AM -0800, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Feb 25, 2010, at 10:01 AM, Tim Bunce wrote:
> 
> >> 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.
> > 
> > I believe the next version of Safe will revert to Safe 1.19 behaviour
> > because the side effects of the change in 2.20 are too severe for it to
> > be left enabled by default.
> 
> Which means losing sort $a <=> $b again, alas. Such was always the
> case in the past, so that might be an okay tradeoff to get recursive
> calls working again, but I certainly hope that Safe can be updated in
> the near future to give us both.
> 
> There seem to be no good answers here.

There is one fairly good answer:

Use a perl that's compiled to support multiplicity but not threads.
That avoids the sort bug and, as an extra bonus, gives plperl a
significant speed boost.

Tim.

In response to

Responses

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: David E. WheelerDate: 2010-02-25 21:06:05
Subject: Re: New PL/Perl failure with Safe 2.2x due to recursion (8.x & 9.0)
Previous:From: Alex HunsakerDate: 2010-02-25 20:11:00
Subject: Re: New PL/Perl failure with Safe 2.2x due to recursion (8.x & 9.0)

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