Re: [HACKERS] Historical trivia (was Re: First Major Open Source Database)

I am CC'ing Jolly and Andrew on this. They may know the answer.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> writes:
> >> It did not use any Ingres code, as told to me by Jolly, I think. My
> >> book has Ingres mentioned as an "ancestor" of Postgres.
>
> > I suppose we could have figured this out ourselves, since Postgres was
> > originally written in Lisp, and afaik Ingres was always C or somesuch
> > traditional compiled-only code. We still see evidence of this in our
> > code tree with the way lists and parser nodes are handled.
>
> It's clear from both the comments and remnants of coding conventions
> that the planner/optimizer was originally Lisp code, and was hand-
> translated to C at some point in the dim mists of prehistory (early
> 1990s, possibly ;-)). That Lisp heritage is responsible for some of
> the better things about the code, and also some of the worse things.
>
> But I'm not sure I believe that *all* of the code was originally
> Lisp. I've never heard of a Lisp interface for yacc-generated
> parsers, for example. The parts of the executor I've looked at
> don't seem nearly as Lispy as the parser/planner/optimizer, either.
> So it seems possible that parts of Postgres were written afresh in
> Lisp while other parts were lifted from an older C implementation.
>
> </idle speculation>
>
> Does anyone here still recall the origins of Postgres? I'm curious
> to know more about the history of this beast.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ************
>

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026