| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, 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 19:05:28 |
| Message-ID: | 28909.1259953528@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> So, do we look for another way to provide the functionality besides
> having a GUC, or is the functionality itself bad?
I don't think we want random Perl code running inside the postmaster,
no matter what the API to cause it is. I might hold my nose for "on
load" code if it can only run in backends, though I still say that
it's a badly designed concept because of the uncertainty about who
will run what when. Shlib load time is not an event that ought to be
user-visible.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David E. Wheeler | 2009-12-04 19:09:36 | Re: First feature patch for plperl - draft [PATCH] |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2009-12-04 19:04:27 | Re: Block-level CRC checks |