| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | James William Pye <pgsql(at)jwp(dot)name> |
| Cc: | Tino Wildenhain <tino(at)wildenhain(dot)de>, James Robinson <jlrobins(at)socialserve(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Hackers Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Pl/Python -- current maintainer? |
| Date: | 2006-02-26 18:08:52 |
| Message-ID: | 19913.1140977332@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
James William Pye <pgsql(at)jwp(dot)name> writes:
> On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 06:36:19PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> I'm not sure it's an issue now that we have pg_pltemplate, but in older
>> versions it's possible to create a language without setting a validator.
>> This would make the validator an unsuitable place for checking the
>> restrictions.
> Hrm. I think this would only be an issue in PL/Py is if the user had the ability
> to alter probin. The handler will never directly execute code in prosrc; it
> relies on a validator to fill in probin.
That design is broken on its face, as the system does not guarantee to
call the validator.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | James William Pye | 2006-02-26 18:30:12 | Re: Pl/Python -- current maintainer? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-02-26 17:57:13 | Re: constraints and sql92 information_schema compliance |