| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: machine-readable explain output |
| Date: | 2009-06-14 14:59:07 |
| Message-ID: | 10802.1244991547@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> As a matter of curiosity, do we have any idea what platforms don't
> support libxml2?
It's only partially about whether libxml2 is portable enough. A person
building Postgres might also have legitimate concerns about how bug-free
and/or secure it is. We've already spent nontrivial amounts of time
working around libxml bugs; and as for security, google shows at least
four CVEs against libxml2 in the past two years, so it's not a
negligible risk. I can entirely see people choosing to build without it.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-06-14 15:21:18 | Re: machine-readable explain output |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-06-14 14:52:49 | Re: machine-readable explain output |