Re: [HACKERS] plpython implementation

2013-07-01 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 7/1/13 1:29 AM, james wrote: > Given how useful it is to have a scripting language that can be used > outside > of the database as well as inside it, would it be reasonable to consider > 'promoting' pllua? You can start promoting pllua by making it work with current PostgreSQL versions. It has

Re: [HACKERS] plpython implementation

2013-07-01 Thread Andres Freund
On 2013-06-30 22:43:52 -0300, Claudio Freire wrote: > Not only that, the CPython interpreter is rather fuzzy about the > division between interpreters. You can initialize multiple > interpreters, but they share a lot of state, so you can never fully > separate them. You'd have some state from the u

Re: [HACKERS] plpython implementation

2013-06-30 Thread Hannu Krosing
On 07/01/2013 07:53 AM, Claudio Freire wrote: > On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 2:29 AM, james wrote: >> On 01/07/2013 02:43, Claudio Freire wrote: >>> In essence, you'd have to use another implementation. CPython guys >>> have left it very clear they don't intend to "fix" that, as they don't >>> consider

Re: [HACKERS] plpython implementation

2013-06-30 Thread Claudio Freire
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 2:29 AM, james wrote: > On 01/07/2013 02:43, Claudio Freire wrote: >> >> In essence, you'd have to use another implementation. CPython guys >> have left it very clear they don't intend to "fix" that, as they don't >> consider it a bug. It's just how it is. > > Given how usef

Re: [HACKERS] plpython implementation

2013-06-30 Thread james
On 01/07/2013 02:43, Claudio Freire wrote: In essence, you'd have to use another implementation. CPython guys have left it very clear they don't intend to "fix" that, as they don't consider it a bug. It's just how it is. Given how useful it is to have a scripting language that can be used outsid

Re: [HACKERS] plpython implementation

2013-06-30 Thread Claudio Freire
On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2013-06-30 14:42:24 +0200, Szymon Guz wrote: >> On 30 June 2013 14:31, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: >> >> > On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 02:18:07PM +0200, Szymon Guz wrote: >> > > > python does not any any sort of reliable sandbox, so there i

Re: [HACKERS] plpython implementation

2013-06-30 Thread Szymon Guz
On 30 June 2013 14:45, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2013-06-30 14:42:24 +0200, Szymon Guz wrote: > > On 30 June 2013 14:31, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 02:18:07PM +0200, Szymon Guz wrote: > > > > > python does not any any sort of reliable sandbox, so there is no

Re: [HACKERS] plpython implementation

2013-06-30 Thread Andres Freund
On 2013-06-30 14:42:24 +0200, Szymon Guz wrote: > On 30 June 2013 14:31, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > > > On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 02:18:07PM +0200, Szymon Guz wrote: > > > > python does not any any sort of reliable sandbox, so there is no > > plpython, > > > > only plpythonu - hence only one i

Re: [HACKERS] plpython implementation

2013-06-30 Thread Szymon Guz
On 30 June 2013 14:31, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 02:18:07PM +0200, Szymon Guz wrote: > > > python does not any any sort of reliable sandbox, so there is no > plpython, > > > only plpythonu - hence only one interpreter per backend is needed. > > > > > Is there any tra

Re: [HACKERS] plpython implementation

2013-06-30 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 06/30/2013 08:18 AM, Szymon Guz wrote: python does not any any sort of reliable sandbox, so there is no plpython, only plpythonu - hence only one interpreter per backend is needed. Is there any track of the discussion that there is no way to make the sandbox? I managed to cr

Re: [HACKERS] plpython implementation

2013-06-30 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 02:18:07PM +0200, Szymon Guz wrote: > > python does not any any sort of reliable sandbox, so there is no plpython, > > only plpythonu - hence only one interpreter per backend is needed. > > > Is there any track of the discussion that there is no way to make the > sandbox? I

Re: [HACKERS] plpython implementation

2013-06-30 Thread Szymon Guz
On 30 June 2013 14:13, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > On 06/30/2013 07:49 AM, Szymon Guz wrote: > >> I'm reading through plperl and plpython implementations and I don't >> understand the way they work. >> >> Comments for plperl say that there are two interpreters (trusted and >> untrusted) for each us

Re: [HACKERS] plpython implementation

2013-06-30 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 06/30/2013 07:49 AM, Szymon Guz wrote: I'm reading through plperl and plpython implementations and I don't understand the way they work. Comments for plperl say that there are two interpreters (trusted and untrusted) for each user session, and they are stored in a hash. Plpython version

Re: [HACKERS] plpython implementation

2013-06-30 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 01:49:53PM +0200, Szymon Guz wrote: > I'm reading through plperl and plpython implementations and I don't > understand the way they work. > > Comments for plperl say that there are two interpreters (trusted and > untrusted) for each user session, and they are stored in a ha