From: | "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: actualized SQL/PSM patch |
Date: | 2008-04-02 04:54:18 |
Message-ID: | 162867790804012154j77ce0094vec62d97c43346315@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Hello
On 01/04/2008, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > I actualized sql/psm patch. This patch can be downloaded from
> > http://www.pgsql.cz/patches/plpgpsm.diff.gz
>
> The fundamental problem I've got with this patch is that it adds 400K
> of new code (and that's just the code, not counting documentation or
> regression tests) that we'll have to maintain, to obtain a feature that
> so far as I've heard there is precisely zero demand for.
>
> The duplicativeness of the code with plpgsql doesn't make this prospect
> any more pleasant, either.
>
> The idea would be a lot easier to swallow if the code were refactored
> to avoid the duplication with plpgsql.
>
This is long run and needs hard reorganisation of plpgsql code. And
moving some plpgsql code to core. But I don't expect so plpgpsm code
can be less than 200KB.
Regards
Pavel Stehule
> regards, tom lane
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Albe Laurenz | 2008-04-02 07:11:59 | Re: Improve shutdown during online backup |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2008-04-02 02:12:05 | Re: script binaries renaming |