> Is there a good reason that pl/pgsql is not installed in databases by
> default?
>
> I think it should be. pl/pgsql is widely used, and having it installed
> by default would be one less hurdle for newbies to overcome when
> learning PostgreSQL. It would also make it easier to distribute
> applications that depend on PostgreSQL and use PL/PgSQL: rather than
> saying "You need PostgreSQL, and then you need to do [ createlang stuff
> ]", those applications can just depend on a sufficiently recent version
> of PostgreSQL.
>
> AFAICS, the overhead of installing it by default would not be large:
> just an extra row in pg_language and a few rows in pg_proc. So I can't
> really see a major reason *not* to do this -- am I missing one?
Problem is people restoring dumps that have the plpgsql create language,
etc. commands in them.
I strongly think that pgsql should come with pl/pgsql on by default,
however ;)
Chris