Andrew Dunstan <and...@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
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
