| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tim Bunce <Tim(dot)Bunce(at)pobox(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Feature patch 1 for plperl [PATCH] |
| Date: | 2010-01-10 23:18:23 |
| Message-ID: | 4B4A603F.5060107@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>> As an example, if people were using such functionality then the DBA
>>> couldn't start preloading plperl for performance without breaking
>>> behavior that some of his users might be depending on.
>>>
>
>
>> If we made plperl.on_perl_init PGC_POSTMASTER and the other two
>> PGC_SUSET would that alloy your concerns?
>>
>
> No, they have to all be PGC_POSTMASTER to answer that concern. Only
> breaking things for superusers isn't really that big an improvement
> over breaking them for everybody.
>
>
>
Well, I don't know about Tim but I think I could live with that. And
when we get some actual experience with using them we'll have a better
handle on whether or not it gives us any pain.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2010-01-10 23:24:42 | Re: damage control mode |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2010-01-10 23:14:18 | Re: Streaming replication status |