Re: Procedural language permissions and consequences
От | Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Procedural language permissions and consequences |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1011169578.6774.7.camel@atlas обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Procedural language permissions and consequences (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
[Hi all! Time for an introduction: I'm just a postgresql user with an interest for the theory behind it (cs student), so I've started to read hackers a while back. As the most frequent reason for me being annoyed about Linux is the Packaging system I just wanted to throw this in here:] On Wed, 2002-01-16 at 04:09, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Furthermore, we can conveniently eliminate the problems related to finding > all the language handlers as shared libraries. Since all languages are > installed by default we can just link the handlers right into the > postmaster, for which we don't need shared libraries. That should give a > great boost to languages that are currently hard to build, i.e., PL/Perl > and PL/Python. And the build system would become a lot simpler and more > portable. A reason against this not addressed by the others: Doing the languages as shared libraries opened only at runtime enables for more easy packaging - psotgresql core pkg with optional psql-tcl, psql-perl,... packages. Linking the libraries in requires packagers to do postgresql, postgresql-perl, postgresql-tcl, postgresql-perl+tcl etc. packages. (I don't know exactly if packagers currently use this possibility. It's been a while since I last installed postgres) Greets -- vbi
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: