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

From Greg Sabino Mullane
Subject Re: Including PL/PgSQL by default
Date
Msg-id a2b97215bbc504add38cffd691b07202@biglumber.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Including PL/PgSQL by default  ("D'Arcy J.M. Cain" <darcy@druid.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160


"D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
> Besides, proof that it would do no extra harm is hardly a strong
> argumet for including it.  Given how easy it is to add it to any DB
> that needs it, I fail to see why we should add it by default.

Because we're not talking about people who have access to a psql
command line.

> Personally I would like to see more things removed from PG and have
> them added as modules when required.

Yes, that will do wonders for our mindshare and adoption rate.

(Dave Page)
>> I know I'm gonna regret wading in on this, but in my mind this is akin
>> to one of the arguments for including tsearch in the core server -
>> namely that too many brain dead hosting providers won't add a contrib
>> module or anything else in a customer's database because they don't

(D'Arcy)
> So their clients will go somewhere <PLUG URL="http://www.Vex.Net/" />
> that does understand what they are installing and can support their
> users properly.  How far are we supposed to go to support the clueless?

Clueless is rather a harsh word to throw out. There's a spectrum of
Postgres users - from backend hackers that install Postgres via
cvs HEAD, to people who do a "yum install", to people who are using
an app which uses Postgres in the backend, and who are barely aware that
Postgres is being used. Supporting them all is a balancing act, but
things like putting tsearch2 in core is absolutely a step in the
right direction.

> And the first time someone uses pl/pgsql to do harm, even if it is due
> to their mis-configuration, who gets blamed?

The person who did the harm perhaps? This just seems unnecessary FUD.

- --
Greg Sabino Mullane greg@turnstep.com
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200802221147
http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iEYEAREDAAYFAke+/QUACgkQvJuQZxSWSsgWlgCdElnDyCKvoD57Oz7UyqIw1hJe
wsYAn3u54vmDAt4qRNlI08A7w3dj2b7q
=IJzq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Satori
Date:
Subject: Re: Including PL/PgSQL by default
Next
From: Robert Lor
Date:
Subject: Proposed changes to DTrace probe implementation