From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Thomas Hallgren <thomas(at)tada(dot)se>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Three weeks left until feature freeze |
Date: | 2006-07-11 14:32:39 |
Message-ID: | 44B3B687.50304@agliodbs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom,
> What about licensing issues? Does PL/Java work with any entirely-open-source
> JVMs? If not, what is the legal situation for distributing PG+PL/Java?
Actually, Sun has re-licensed the JRE to make it OSS-compatible (it's
now available for Debian, for example) They're doing a Java licensing
session at OSCON if you have any specific questions, or I can ping the
Java Licensing Guru directly. But even if other JRE's aren't supported,
licensing shouldn't be an obstacle.
>
> I'm also a bit concerned about size. By my count, lines of source code:
>
> plpgsql 19890
> plperl 4902
> plpython 4163
> pltcl 4498
> pljava 1.3.0 38711
>
> IOW pljava is (already) bigger than the other four PLs put together.
That is odd. Thomas?
>
> I'm inclined to think that pljava is best off staying as a separate
> project.
I disagree. One of the things I'm asked by every single tech market
analyst, after replication & clustering, is whether we have support for
procedural Java. So it's something large-scale users want. If PL/Tcl
belongs in the back end, then so does PL/Java.
--Josh Berkus
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2006-07-11 14:46:34 | Re: Max size of a btree index entry |
Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2006-07-11 14:27:18 | Re: CTIDs invalidations and dropping columns. |