From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Pl/Java - next step? |
Date: | 2004-02-22 20:50:12 |
Message-ID: | 40391604.90803@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
One perfectly good reason for this scenario is portability between
postgres and any database implementing the standard (e.g. Oracle).
cheers
andrew
Dave Cramer wrote:
>Not to minimize your work, as I think it is great, but this particular
>use-case I consider to be overkill for pl/java. It is probably easier to
>use pl/pgsql if all you want to do is calculations.
>
>We had suggested an online chat to discuss this, when would you be
>available for that? What timezone are you in. Laszlo is in hungary, and
>I am in canada, so we are likely spread allover the the map .
>
>Dave
>
>
>On Sun, 2004-02-22 at 12:28, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
>
>
>>>1) Using JNI, you probably still want to communicate with another
>>>running java process.
>>>
>>>
>>B.T.W. I don't really agree on "probably". There are numerous cases when you
>>will be happy just communicating with the database, communicate with another
>>remote resource (message queue typically), or not communicate at all
>>(calculations, etc.).
>>
>>Regards,
>>Thomas Hallgren
>>
>>
>>
>>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-02-22 21:47:56 | Re: [HACKERS] Mac OS X, PostgreSQL, PL/Tcl |
Previous Message | HORNYAK Laszlo | 2004-02-22 20:33:21 | Re: Pl/Java - next step? |