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

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> If we turn Tim's proposal down, I suspect someone will create a fork of 
> plperl that allows it anyway - it's not like it needs anything changed 
> elsewhere in the backend - it would be a drop-in replacement, pretty much.

The question is not about whether we think it's useful; the question
is about whether it's safe.

> I think if we do this the on_perl_init setting should probably be 
> PGC_POSTMASTER, which would remove any issue about it changing 
> underneath us.

Yes, if the main intended usage is in combination with preloading perl
at postmaster start, it would be pointless to imagine that PGC_SIGHUP
is useful anyway.

			regards, tom lane