Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> 3. Support separate interpreters if possible, refuse to run both plperl
>> and plperlu functions in the same backend if not.
> How would we decide which wins in the third case? "first in" seems
> rather arbitrary. If we went that way I'd probably plump for just
> plperlu to be allowed.
"First used in a given backend" was exactly what I had in mind.
Certainly it wouldn't be perfect, but your proposal seems to be
"disable plperl altogether if no separate-interpreter support",
which seems overly harsh. Especially for someone who doesn't
even want to install plperlu.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
