Re: First feature patch for plperl - draft [PATCH]

On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> "David E. Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> writes:
>> On Dec 4, 2009, at 10:36 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I vote a big no on this.
>
>> That's fine. It's relatively simple for an admin to create a Perl module that does everything she wants, call it PGInit or something, and then just make the GUC:
>
>>     plperl.on_perl_init = 'use PGInit;'
>
> No, you missed the point: I'm objecting to having any such thing as
> plperl.on_perl_init, full stop.
>
> Aside from the points I already made, it's not even well defined.
> What is to happen if the admin changes the value when the system
> is already up?

So, do we look for another way to provide the functionality besides
having a GUC, or is the functionality itself bad?

...Robert