From: | "D'Arcy J(dot)M(dot) Cain" <darcy(at)druid(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | "Dave Page" <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> |
Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Including PL/PgSQL by default |
Date: | 2008-02-22 16:03:18 |
Message-ID: | 20080222110318.160843d8.darcy@druid.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 07:37:55 +0000
"Dave Page" <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> wrote:
> I know I'm gonna regret wading in on this, but in my mind this is akin
> to one of the arguments for including tsearch in the core server -
> namely that too many brain dead hosting providers won't add a contrib
> module or anything else in a customer's database because they don't
So their clients will go somewhere <PLUG URL="http://www.Vex.Net/" />
that does understand what they are installing and can support their
users properly. How far are we supposed to go to support the clueless?
> understand that just because it's not there by default doesn't mean
> it's in any way second rate. Including pl/pgsql in template1 will help
> those folks who forwhatever reason use such providers, whilst more
> savvy providers can easily disable it post-initdb if thats what they
> want to do.
And the first time someone uses pl/pgsql to do harm, even if it is due
to their mis-configuration, who gets blamed?
--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy(at)druid(dot)net> | Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on
+1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2008-02-22 16:04:43 | Re: Linking backend in one piece |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2008-02-22 15:56:43 | Re: Linking backend in one piece |