On 09/15/2014 11:49 AM, cowwoc wrote:
> 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
I've seen too many good java developers write too much terrible
database-oriented code. If they are good with db and sql, plpgsql will
not be a problem to learn.