| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Friedrich Dodt <friedrich(dot)dodt(at)efonds24(dot)de>, <pgsql-interfaces(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Where is PLbash ?? |
| Date: | 2002-06-25 21:56:10 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.44.0206252240071.1435-100000@localhost.localdomain |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-interfaces |
Tom Lane writes:
> I know you will say that PL/sh is not any more dangerous than the
> untrusted versions of plperl and pltcl, but there is a difference.
> PL/sh has *no reason to exist* other than to implement
> non-transaction-safe outside-the-database behavior; there is no safe
> behavior for which it is the preferred tool.
What is the preferred way to implement non-database side effects, such as
triggering emails when certain events occur? We should try to explain
this somewhere.
Certainly, PL/sh is not the preferred way. It's terribly inefficient and
not nearly portable.
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-06-25 22:01:43 | Re: Where is PLbash ?? |
| Previous Message | Jan Wieck | 2002-06-25 20:53:58 | Re: Where is PLbash ?? |