Re: Why isn't Java support part of Postgresql core?

Hi Pavel,

On 15/09/2014 1:40 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> The main drivers are:
>
> 1. Not having to learn yet another language. I find the
> expressiveness and readability of the other scripting
> languages very clunky compared to Java.
>
>
> PLpgSQL is different, it is based on Ada language

I'm sure it's a very lovely language, but it is yet another language
most people are not familiar with and will have to learn.

> 1. Ease of porting triggers across databases. The only thing that
> really changes across databases is how triggers interact with
> input/output parameters. The main body remains the same
> (thanks to JDBC). This is quasi portability in the sense that
> the underlying SQL is itself quasi portable, but I find it a
> much more compelling approach than having to rewrite the
> triggers for each database type.
>
> any time plpgsql will be faster then Java probably due a type
> compatibility with Postgres and execution as inprocess
>
> There is a few task, that can be done in database, that will be faster
> in PL/Java than PL/pgSQL

I think developers choosing this route (myself included) are willing to
pay the price in exchange for improved readability/maintainability (the
assumption being that the resulting performance will be "good enough").
There seem to be plenty of people heading in this direction otherwise
other languages (like pl/v8) wouldn't enjoy the popularity they do.

Gili