On Jan 29, 2008, at 1:07 PM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 08:14:28AM -0800, David Fetter wrote:
>>
>> I wouldn't trust that library or anything that depends on it if I
>> were
>> you. It's been unmaintained for a *very* long time.
>
> Because code rusts when it's sitting around on a hard drive?
>
> Pg.pm doesn't get much attention, I agree, but I've actually never
> run into
> a (n undocumented) bug with it. Also, for simple Perl access for
> Postgres-dedicated use, DBI can be a little heavyweight.
>
You mean other than the fact that it doesn't support the V3 protocol,
doesn't support escaping parameters, is a one-for-one wrapper for the
libpq from eight years ago (and has never been updated since), there
is a timing bug from 4 years ago still open (http://rt.cpan.org/
Public/Bug/Display.html?id=3177), and the docs include zingers like
"Starting with postgresql-6.5 it is required to use large objects
only inside a transaction"?
The postgresql from eight years ago is also quite rusty.
Cheers,
M