Re: [PATCHES] Warning for missing createlang

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Warning for missing createlang
Date: 2003-09-06 16:52:13
Message-ID: 29546.1062867133@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> I did see a reference in the archives to a problem with heavy recursion
> as a possible security hole. I guess my answer to that would be that if
> you are worried about it you should drop the language, but I don't see
> this alone as a reason not to install it by default. After all, you
> don't need plpgsql to bring the system to its knees :-)

Yeah, now that we allow recursion in SQL functions, you don't need a PL
language to overflow the stack. So that particular argument is seeming
a bit weak. Were there any other security arguments against making
plpgsql standard?

Inability to load existing pg_dump archives might be a bigger objection.
However, we could fix that if pg_restore were modified to not stop dead
in its tracks upon encountering an error. IMHO that was a wrong choice
from the beginning ... pg_dump scripts don't act that way, and
pg_restore should not either.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marek Lewczuk 2003-09-06 17:09:08 Re: Needed function IF(expr, expr, expr)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-09-06 16:47:07 Re: Needed function IF(expr, expr, expr)

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2003-09-07 03:41:47 MinGW patch
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2003-09-06 13:14:57 Re: [PATCHES] Warning for missing createlang