From: | KuroiNeko <evpopkov(at)carrier(dot)kiev(dot)ua> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: how good is PostgreSQL |
Date: | 2000-11-01 00:51:05 |
Message-ID: | 39FF68F9.nail3422IZVEM@ed.ed |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
> We run Perl on machines that pale compared to theirs,
> and get far better performance. : )
Well, don't get me wrong, I'm not going to a war. Here :) But CGI is so
simple and straightforward that anything more than C is quite an overkill
(think assembly).
Myself I'm planning to port all my PERL stuff eventually. Yes, PERL is
great for string handling, but when you spend a couple of weeks on BugTraq,
you'll suddenly feel that it's still too much. When you only let `known
good' values in, lex or regexp libs will do.
Sorry for the offtopic, anyone interested is welcome to email me in
private.
Ed
--
contaminated fish and microchips
huge supertankers on Arabian trips
oily propaganda from the leaders' lips
all about the future
there's people over here, people over there
everybody's looking for a little more air
crossing all the borders just to take their share
planning for the future
Rainbow, Difficult to Cure
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alex Pilosov | 2000-11-01 00:58:31 | Re: True ACID under linux (no fsync)? |
Previous Message | Steve Wolfe | 2000-11-01 00:39:54 | Re: how good is PostgreSQL |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gunnar R|nning | 2000-11-01 00:58:55 | Re: how good is PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | Alfred Perlstein | 2000-11-01 00:40:33 | Re: Query cache import? |