On 11.08.26 01:00, Tom Lane wrote:
> However, I think your apparent ambition to have*zero* use of system()
> is a bridge too far. In particular:
>
>> There's an important topic related to using shell versus not a shell. In
>> some places like `archive_command` people may use `&&`, but this idea
>> aims to avoid this kind of behavior since it's not secure.
> I think breaking the existing definition of archive_command and
> similar GUCs is a nonstarter. You're going to make many users
> unhappy and only a tiny minority happier.
Right. The direction should be, you don't have to use archive_command.
There is already an alternative in archive_library, or indirectly by
using something like pg_receivewal. Similar alternatives could be
designed for other cases where a shell command appears in a public API.
