Re: [HACKERS] Iterating generator from C (PostgreSQL's pl/python RETUN

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>
Cc: python-list(at)python(dot)org, "pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Iterating generator from C (PostgreSQL's pl/python RETUN
Date: 2006-05-15 21:21:32
Message-ID: 14388.1147728092@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net> writes:
>> Sven Suursoho wrote:
>>> As for testing in actual pl/python build environment, we had objections from
>>> leading postgresql Tom Lane that even if we do test it at build time,
>>> a determined DBA may substitute a buggy python.so later and still crash her DB instance.

The above is a straw-man depiction of my point. What I said was that just
because python is up-to-date on the system where plpython is *compiled*
does not mean it'll be up-to-date on the system where plpython is *used*.
With the increasing popularity of prebuilt packages (rpm, deb, etc),
I think it's folly to use a build-time check for this.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2006-05-15 21:23:00 Re: does wal archiving block the current client connection?
Previous Message Hannu Krosing 2006-05-15 20:33:10 Re: Iterating generator from C (PostgreSQL's pl/python RETUN

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hannu Krosing 2006-05-15 22:12:10 Re: [HACKERS] Iterating generator from C (PostgreSQL's
Previous Message Hannu Krosing 2006-05-15 20:33:10 Re: Iterating generator from C (PostgreSQL's pl/python RETUN