From: | "dandl" <david(at)andl(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | "'Adam Brusselback'" <adambrusselback(at)gmail(dot)com>, "'Joy Arulraj'" <jarulraj(at)cs(dot)cmu(dot)edu> |
Cc: | "'kang joni'" <kangjoni76(at)gmail(dot)com>, "'Dmitry Igrishin'" <dmitigr(at)gmail(dot)com>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: C++ port of Postgres |
Date: | 2016-08-16 06:24:27 |
Message-ID: | 007001d1f786$d903fa90$8b0befb0$@andl.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Just wondering what the end goal is for this project... Is it to just maintain an up to date Postgres fork that will compile with a C++ compiler? Is it to get a conversation going for a direction for Postgres itself to move? The former I don't see gaining much traction or doing all that much for the state of the project. The latter possibly could if the community gets on board.
I would certainly hope the latter. Having done some work on extension functions and an extension language for Postgres, the current situation can be quite limiting.
* Parts of my code could only be written in C++, so I finished up with a mixed build, which is not ideal.
* My other issue was dealing with the Datum macros. Type-safe inline C++ functions would help reduce dumb errors.
Not compelling reasons perhaps, but just a vote for a move in that direction, some time.
Regards
David M Bennett FACS
_____
Andl - A New Database Language - andl.org
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | James Sewell | 2016-08-16 07:11:10 | Re: Critical failure of standby |
Previous Message | Pekka Rinne | 2016-08-16 05:34:50 | Re: upgrade to repmgr3 |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2016-08-16 06:30:04 | Re: Declarative partitioning - another take |
Previous Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2016-08-16 06:09:20 | Re: Index Onlys Scan for expressions |