On Jan 19, 2010, at 9:26 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > The first thing I think we need to do is move the GUC processing code out of > _PG_init() and into plperl_init_interp(), protected by a flag to make sure > it's only called successfully once. I'm trying to work out a neat way to put > the value back if there is an exception, but it's a bit ugly.
Will this solve the underlying bug in custom GUCs? I'm assuming there is such a bug. Won't this be an issue for other modules that have custom GUCs, potentially a security issue? The addition of new PL/Perl custom GUCs notwithstanding, it sure seems like a potential security vulnerability such as this should be addressed ASAP. Who knows this stuff? Best, David -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
