Re: plperl/plperlu interaction

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> 3. Support separate interpreters if possible, refuse to run both plperl
>> and plperlu functions in the same backend if not.

> How would we decide which wins in the third case? "first in" seems 
> rather arbitrary. If we went that way I'd probably plump for just 
> plperlu to be allowed.

"First used in a given backend" was exactly what I had in mind.
Certainly it wouldn't be perfect, but your proposal seems to be
"disable plperl altogether if no separate-interpreter support",
which seems overly harsh.  Especially for someone who doesn't
even want to install plperlu.
        regards, tom lane