Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Indeed, AFAICS the major *point* of these additions is to allow people
>> to insert unknown other functionality that is likely to interact
>> with the rest of the backend; a prospect that doesn't make me feel
>> better about it.

> No. The major use case we've seen for END blocks is to allow a profiler 
> to write its data out. That should have zero interaction with the rest 
> of the backend.

Really?  We've found that gprof, for instance, doesn't exactly have
"zero interaction with the rest of the backend" --- there's actually
a couple of different bits in there to help it along, including a
behavioral change during shutdown.  I rather doubt that Perl profilers
would turn out much different.

But in any case, I don't believe for a moment that profiling is the only
or even the largest use to which people would try to put this.

                        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

Reply via email to