=?UTF-8?B?w4FsdmFybyBIZXJuw6FuZGV6IFRvcnRvc2E=?= a...@nosys.es writes:
What I can add is that, if Postgres is to devote resources to a new
language, I would plan it with a broader scope. What would attract most
users? Would it bring non postgres users to Postgres? What could be one
of
On 01/09/14 20:42, Tom Lane wrote:
=?UTF-8?B?w4FsdmFybyBIZXJuw6FuZGV6IFRvcnRvc2E=?= a...@nosys.es writes:
What I can add is that, if Postgres is to devote resources to a new
language, I would plan it with a broader scope. What would attract most
users? Would it bring non postgres users
2014-09-01 20:58 GMT+02:00 Álvaro Hernández Tortosa a...@nosys.es:
On 01/09/14 20:42, Tom Lane wrote:
=?UTF-8?B?w4FsdmFybyBIZXJuw6FuZGV6IFRvcnRvc2E=?= a...@nosys.es writes:
What I can add is that, if Postgres is to devote resources to a new
language, I would plan it with a broader
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 8:38 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
c) plpgsql and plpgsql2 are the same code base, with a small number
of places that act differently depending on the language version.
+1 to the idea
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 8:34 PM, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa a...@nosys.es wrote:
What I can add is that, if Postgres is to devote resources to a new
language, I would plan it with a broader scope. What would attract most
users? Would it bring non postgres users to Postgres? What could be one
On 01/09/14 21:08, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2014-09-01 20:58 GMT+02:00 Álvaro Hernández Tortosa a...@nosys.es
mailto:a...@nosys.es:
On 01/09/14 20:42, Tom Lane wrote:
=?UTF-8?B?w4FsdmFybyBIZXJuw6FuZGV6IFRvcnRvc2E=?= a...@nosys.es
mailto:a...@nosys.es writes:
On 01/09/14 21:52, Joel Jacobson wrote:
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 8:34 PM, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa a...@nosys.es wrote:
What I can add is that, if Postgres is to devote resources to a new
language, I would plan it with a broader scope. What would attract most
users? Would it bring non
On 2014-09-01 11:11 PM, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa wrote:
No, really: if there is a new version of a language, which
modifies the current syntax of plpgsql; if plpgsql is already very
similar to PL/SQL: why not rather than coming up with a new syntax use
an already existing one? One that
Álvaro Hernández Tortosa wrote
On 01/09/14 21:52, Joel Jacobson wrote:
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 8:34 PM, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa lt;
aht@
gt; wrote:
What I can add is that, if Postgres is to devote resources to a new
language, I would plan it with a broader scope. What would attract
On 01/09/14 23:31, Marko Tiikkaja wrote:
On 2014-09-01 11:11 PM, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa wrote:
No, really: if there is a new version of a language, which
modifies the current syntax of plpgsql; if plpgsql is already very
similar to PL/SQL: why not rather than coming up with a new
On 01/09/14 23:46, David G Johnston wrote:
Álvaro Hernández Tortosa wrote
On 01/09/14 21:52, Joel Jacobson wrote:
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 8:34 PM, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa lt;
aht@
gt; wrote:
What I can add is that, if Postgres is to devote resources to a new
language, I would plan it
On Sep 1, 2014, at 10:45 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
What is actually being proposed, AFAICS, is a one-shot fix for a bunch
of unfortunate choices. That might be worth doing, but let's not fool
ourselves about whether it’s one-shot or not.
Well, one shot every 18 years is not so
On 09/01/2014 08:09 PM, Neil Tiffin wrote:
On Sep 1, 2014, at 10:45 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
What is actually being proposed, AFAICS, is a one-shot fix for a bunch
of unfortunate choices. That might be worth doing, but let's not fool
ourselves about whether it’s one-shot or
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Andrew Dunstan [via PostgreSQL]
ml-node+s1045698n5817265...@n5.nabble.com wrote:
On 09/01/2014 08:09 PM, Neil Tiffin wrote:
That should be enough alone to suggest postgreSQL start working on a
modern, in core, fast, fully supported language. Of course
On 09/02/2014 09:40 AM, David G Johnston wrote:
Random thought as I wrote that: how about considering how pl/pgsql
functionality can be generalize so that it is a database API that
another language can call? In that way the server would drive the core
functionality and the language would
On 09/02/2014 08:09 AM, Neil Tiffin wrote:
Now I could use other languages as was suggested upstream. Lets see, I use R
all the time, but R is not a first class language, not in core, and its slow.
Python 3 would be acceptable to me, but its untrusted. tcl I don’t know and
don’t want to
On 09/02/2014 05:46 AM, David G Johnston wrote:
The goal of adding PL/SQL would be to increase the user base of the project
and hopefully attract new blood to the development team in order to maximize
long-term survivability and increase the pace of innovation. We would be
unable to introduce
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 11:12 PM, Craig Ringer cr...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 09/02/2014 09:40 AM, David G Johnston wrote:
Random thought as I wrote that: how about considering how pl/pgsql
functionality can be generalize so that it is a database API that
another language can call? In
On 09/01/2014 11:19 PM, Joel Jacobson wrote:
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Craig Ringer cr...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 09/01/2014 10:41 PM, Joel Jacobson wrote:
This is exactly why we need a new language.
All the clumsy stuff we cannot fix in plpgsql, can easily be fixed in
plpgsql2, with
On 09/02/2014 11:42 AM, David Johnston wrote:
Yet pl/pgsql does not have to use SPI-interface type calls to interact
with PostgreSQL at the SQL level...
That's right.
I don't have an answer to your questions but the one I'm asking is
whether a particular language could hide all of the
On 02/09/14 15:46, Craig Ringer wrote:
was is exactly why we need a new language and that All the clumsy
stuff we cannot fix in plpgsql, can easily be fixed in plpgsql2, with
the most beautiful syntax we can come up with. But you haven't said HOW
you propose to fix this one case.
On 14/09/02 12:24, Craig Ringer wrote:
On 09/02/2014 08:09 AM, Neil Tiffin wrote:
(...)
That should be enough alone to suggest postgreSQL start working on a modern,
in core, fast, fully supported language.
I couldn't disagree more.
If we were to implement anything, it'd be PL/PSM
Craig Ringer cr...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
If someone came up with a convincing PL/SQL compatibility layer then
it'd be worth considering adopting - when it was ready. But of course,
anyone who does the work for that is quite likely to want to sell it to
cashed-up Oracle users looking to save
On 09/02/2014 12:40 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
As a case in point, EDB have spent quite a few man-years on their Oracle
compatibility layer; and it's still not a terribly exact match, according
to my colleagues who have looked at it. So that is a tarbaby I don't
personally care to touch ... even
201 - 224 of 224 matches
Mail list logo
