Re: Comparing databases

* Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> wrote:

<snip>
> AFAIK, and I could certainly be wrong, the level of support in postgresql for
> custom operators, types, aggregates, libraries, and functions is superior to
> any of the databases listed here.
Which other RDBMS also support these features ?
And which syntax do they use for that ? (same than psql ?)

<snip>
> BTW - Was just reading that M$ plans to support the CRE in Longhorn by 2005,
> which will give developers the ability to write stored procedures in many
> different languages.
But:
plan to do != doing

;-)

They also planned to create a usable shell interpreter. What came out
was "windows scripting host" ... oh, well ...

<snip>
> In any case, it certainly holds up with mysql, as Josh addressed in his
> response. One thing he didn't mention, which I still think is true, is that
> in order to have a patch accepted into mysql, you have to turn copyright over
> to them for inclusion in their proprietary products.
Hah, I should also start such a project. Let others do my work for $0 ;-)

<snip>
> Hmm... I'd guess there is something similar for folks running firebird on
> *nix? Actually I'd guess that all of these database have *some way* of doing
> this, but again, I don't think its as easy or as extensible as postgresql.
Well, it can't be easier, since - some years ago, when I didnt cope with
such things yet - my doctor has sent me an working code snippet for
writing a simple function ;-)

cu
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Enrico Weigelt == metux IT service

phone: +49 36207 519931 www: http://www.metux.de/
fax: +49 36207 519932 email: contact(at)metux(dot)de
cellphone: +49 174 7066481
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- DSL ab 0 Euro. -- statische IP -- UUCP -- Hosting -- Webshops --
---------------------------------------------------------------------