2011/2/26 Jan Urbański <wulc...@wulczer.org>: > ----- Original message ----- >> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 6:04 PM, Jan Urbański <wulc...@wulczer.org> >> wrote: >> > On 15/02/11 20:39, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> > > On tis, 2011-02-15 at 09:58 +0100, Jan Urbański wrote: >> > > > [a bug that we don't know how to fix] > >> From this discussion I gather that we have a problem here that we >> don't exactly know how to fix, so I'm inclined to suggest that we mark >> this Returned with Feedback in the CommitFest and instead add it to >> the TODO. Since this is a pre-existing bug and not a new regression, >> it should not be something we hold up beta for. > > I'm officially at a loss on how to fix that bug without some serious gutting > of how PL/Python arguments work. If someone comes up with a brilliant way to > solve this problem, we can commit it after beta, or even during the 9.2 cycle > (should the brilliant solution be backpatcheable).
Is this discussion related to the following todo item: Create a new restricted execution class that will allow passing function arguments in as locals. Passing them as globals means functions cannot be called recursively. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
