Re: First feature patch for plperl - draft [PATCH]
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: "David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.com>,
Tim Bunce <Tim.Bunce@pobox.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2009-12-04T18:56:14Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > "David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.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