Re: Including PL/PgSQL by default - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Including PL/PgSQL by default
Date
Msg-id 20693.1203647583@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Including PL/PgSQL by default  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
Responses Re: Including PL/PgSQL by default
Re: Including PL/PgSQL by default
Re: Including PL/PgSQL by default
Re: Including PL/PgSQL by default
List pgsql-hackers
Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
> On Thursday 21 February 2008 11:36, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Would it satisfy people if plpgsql were in postgres, but neither
>> template DB, after initdb?

> No, the real-world use-case we're trying to satisfy is hosted and/or 
> locked-down installations where the developer doesn't have superuser access.
> So putting it in "postgres" wouldn't help with that.

That statement is content-free, Josh.  Exactly what are you assuming
this developer *does* have?  For example, if he hasn't got createdb
privilege, it will hardly matter to him whether any DBs other than
"postgres" contain plpgsql.  If he does have createdb, it's already
possible by default for him to create trusted languages including
plpgsql in his new DB.  So it's still 100% unclear to me who we are
catering to.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: Batch update of indexes on data loading
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Memory leaks on SRF rescan