Re: plpython implementation - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Martijn van Oosterhout
Subject Re: plpython implementation
Date
Msg-id 20130630120541.GA2950@svana.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to plpython implementation  (Szymon Guz <mabewlun@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 01:49:53PM +0200, Szymon Guz wrote:
> I'm reading through plperl and plpython implementations and I don't
> understand the way they work.
>
> Comments for plperl say that there are two interpreters (trusted and
> untrusted) for each user session, and they are stored in a hash.

The point is that python has no version for untrusted users, since it's
been accepted that there's no way to build a python sandbox for
untrusted code. There was actually a small competition to make one but
it failed, since then they don't bother.

Perl does provide a sandbox, hence you can have two interpreters in a
single backend.

Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout   <kleptog@svana.org>   http://svana.org/kleptog/
> He who writes carelessly confesses thereby at the very outset that he does
> not attach much importance to his own thoughts.  -- Arthur Schopenhauer

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Szymon Guz
Date:
Subject: plpython implementation
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: plpython implementation