| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tim Bunce <Tim(dot)Bunce(at)pobox(dot)com>, Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Add on_perl_init and proper destruction to plperl [PATCH] |
| Date: | 2010-01-28 00:15:57 |
| Message-ID: | 17378.1264637757@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"David E. Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> writes:
> On Jan 27, 2010, at 4:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Absolutely. The difference here is in who is going to be expected to
>> try to deal with any problems. When somebody says "if I do this in
>> plperlu, my database crashes! Postgres sux!" it's not going to help to
>> say "that's a Perl bug", even if an independent observer might agree.
>> It's going to be *our* problem, and I don't see any reason to expect
>> a shred of help from the Perl side.
> Is that not the case with plperlu already?
Sure. Which is why I'm resisting expanding our exposure to it.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2010-01-28 00:16:10 | Re: Add on_perl_init and proper destruction to plperl [PATCH] |
| Previous Message | David E. Wheeler | 2010-01-28 00:10:59 | Re: Add on_perl_init and proper destruction to plperl [PATCH] |