Re: Where is PLbash ??

Tom Lane writes:

> I know you will say that PL/sh is not any more dangerous than the
> untrusted versions of plperl and pltcl, but there is a difference.
> PL/sh has *no reason to exist* other than to implement
> non-transaction-safe outside-the-database behavior; there is no safe
> behavior for which it is the preferred tool.

What is the preferred way to implement non-database side effects, such as
triggering emails when certain events occur?  We should try to explain
this somewhere.

Certainly, PL/sh is not the preferred way.  It's terribly inefficient and
not nearly portable.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net