Re: Feature patch 1 for plperl [PATCH]

Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>   
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>     
>>> As an example, if people were using such functionality then the DBA
>>> couldn't start preloading plperl for performance without breaking
>>> behavior that some of his users might be depending on.
>>>       
>
>   
>> If we made plperl.on_perl_init PGC_POSTMASTER and the other two 
>> PGC_SUSET would that alloy your concerns?
>>     
>
> No, they have to all be PGC_POSTMASTER to answer that concern.  Only
> breaking things for superusers isn't really that big an improvement
> over breaking them for everybody.
>
>             
>   

Well, I don't know about Tim but I think I could live with that. And 
when we get some actual experience with using them we'll have a better 
handle on whether or not it gives us any pain.

cheers

andrew