From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Kyle Bateman <kyle@actarg.com>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: clock command regression in pltcl?
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2010 01:50:12 -0500
Message-ID: <2072.1264229412@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1720.1264227988@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <4B5A7E04.8030905@actarg.com>
<1720.1264227988@sss.pgh.pa.us>
I wrote:
> I am not sure if this is a bug or an intentional change on their part.
> Apparently "clock" was completely rewritten in 8.5, with a lot more
> features, which could mean it's not safe anymore. But I don't see
> any explicit acknowledgement in the release notes that it's now
> considered unsafe.
Oh, this is interesting: tclInterp.c's SlaveCreate() has a special
purpose hack now:
/*
* The [clock] command presents a safe API, but uses unsafe features in
* its implementation. This means it has to be implemented in safe interps
* as an alias to a version in the (trusted) master.
*/
if (safe) {
Tcl_Obj *clockObj;
int status;
TclNewLiteralStringObj(clockObj, "clock");
Tcl_IncrRefCount(clockObj);
status = AliasCreate(interp, slaveInterp, masterInterp, clockObj,
clockObj, 0, NULL);
Tcl_DecrRefCount(clockObj);
if (status != TCL_OK) {
goto error2;
}
}
So apparently it's still *supposed* to work, but there's something about
the way we are using tcl that makes it not work. Any tcl experts in the
house?
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, kyle@actarg.com
Subject: Re: clock command regression in pltcl?
In-Reply-To: <2072.1264229412@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox