Re: [HACKERS] PlPython - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: [HACKERS] PlPython
Date
Msg-id 200306232104.h5NL4KP11685@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PlPython  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] PlPython  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-general
Tom Lane wrote:
> elein  <elein@varlena.com> writes:
> > For 7.4 (which I expect is the patch's target) it might be
> > best to make both names point to the same thing with a
> > clear release note that says that they are the same thing
> > and that plpython[u] is now untrusted.
>
> I don't know any way to actually do that, though.  If we put two entries
> in pg_language then functions created in plpython will stay associated
> with that entry.  That'd probably be the worst of all possible worlds,
> since a person looking at pg_language would quite reasonably assume that
> plpython was still trusted and the untrusted plpythonu was just an
> addition.  (Especially if he happened to know that such an addition was
> planned long ago.)  You could shoot yourself in the foot pretty badly
> with such a misunderstanding :-(
>
> The behavior that I think would be most useful would be to automatically
> transpose CREATE FUNCTION ... LANGUAGE "plpython" into CREATE FUNCTION
> ... LANGUAGE "plpythonu".  Which we could do with an ugly hack in CREATE
> FUNCTION (ugly, but no worse than things we've done to index opclass
> names, for example).  But it could be too confusing.

You mean in gram.y?  Yes, I think that is our only choice.

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: PlPython
Next
From: Jonathan Bartlett
Date:
Subject: Re: different datatypes in index scan join