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