Re: pl/{perl,pgsql} (was Re: AW: [HACKERS] triggers, views and ru les (not instead))

Jan, I think you describe the correct picture of what is needed for
PL/pgSQL.

My comments:
>     No  actual  development  -  just have something in mind how I
>     would implement it. I'll get into details after 6.3  release.
>     PL/pgSQL will have at least the following capabilities:
> 
>         - local variable
		local to the procedure (in a per call context)
	I think it will also need:
           - global variable
		in a session context (standard mentions these also)
>         - local records
>         - access to the database over SPI
>         - control structures (if/else/while/loop)
>         - elog messages
>         - triggers can modify new tuple
>         - triggers can skip operation
> 

>     If  perl doesn't have such a restricted interpreter facility,
>     then perl might never become a  TRUSTED  procedural  language
>     like  Tcl  is.

There is taintperl.
I don't see anything that speaks against 2 variants of pl/perl. One trusted,
using taintperl
and one untrusted opening the internals to superusers, like in C.
BTW.: How do you write an input or output function in pl/tcl if all you get
is the external representation ?

Andreas

P.S.: there is no need to email me directly, unless you need something very
fast,
	since I do read all pgsql-hackers mail in the digest. Thanx all.