Re: [HACKERS] plpgsql by default (was: Re: Remote administration contrib module)

2006-04-10 Thread Andrew - Supernews
On 2006-04-11, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andrew - Supernews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> On 2006-04-10, Bruce Momjian wrote: [ security ] >>> It actually is the reason I have heard. > >> And it was duly debunked. > > That is the reasoning, and personally I agree with it. You do

Re: [HACKERS] plpgsql by default (was: Re: Remote administration contrib module)

2006-04-10 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew - Supernews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 2006-04-10, Bruce Momjian wrote: >>> [ security ] >> It actually is the reason I have heard. > And it was duly debunked. That is the reasoning, and personally I agree with it. You don't leave sharp objects sitting around if you have no need to

[HACKERS] plpgsql by default (was: Re: Remote administration contrib module)

2006-04-10 Thread Andrew - Supernews
On 2006-04-10, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> > This is similar to the fact we don't include plpgsql by default in >> > databases, for the same reason, [the reason being "security"] >> >> I doubt that that is really the reason. > > It actually is the reason I have heard. And i