| From: | Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Kurt Harriman <harriman(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, James Mansion <james(at)mansionfamily(dot)plus(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Mostly Harmless: Welcoming our C++ friends |
| Date: | 2008-12-12 02:31:08 |
| Message-ID: | 4941CCEC.9020607@cheapcomplexdevices.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Given the above constraints, I think the only real role for C++ here
> would be to allow access to third-party C++ libraries as Postgres
> extensions --- for instance something like an XML or numerical analysis
I seem to recall that we're already able to do this.
IIRC, some older postgis's wrapped some C++ library that they
used internally; and some of my old scripts for installing
postgres have: "env LDFLAGS=-lstdc++ ./configure --prefix=$PGHOME"
I guess existing current c++ postgres extensions probably have a C wrapper?
and I guess the main benefit of this project would be that the C wrapper
could be thinner (or even nonexistant?) with these proposed changes?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nathan Boley | 2008-12-12 02:39:56 | Re: benchmarking the query planner |
| Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2008-12-12 02:23:33 | Re: benchmarking the query planner |