| From: | "Douglas McNaught" <doug(at)mcnaught(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Mark Mielke" <mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc> |
| Cc: | "Chris Browne" <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL future ideas |
| Date: | 2008-09-27 16:37:31 |
| Message-ID: | 5ded07e00809270937y377e06eeo994468068be1990f@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 12:13 PM, Mark Mielke <mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc> wrote:
> If
> some parts of PostgreSQL are not performance bottlenecks, and they are
> extremely complicated to write in C, and very easy to write in something
> else common and simple (I've never used LUA myself?), I imagine it would be
> acceptable to the community.
As long as they can expose their interfaces using the standard PG
function call interface, and use the documented SPI mechanism to talk
to the rest of the back end. Stuff that hooks into undocumented or
unstable parts of the code would be much less viable.
-Doug
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Martin Gainty | 2008-09-27 16:44:46 | Re: sequence... my nightmare :-( |
| Previous Message | Alain Roger | 2008-09-27 16:21:26 | Re: sequence... my nightmare :-( |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-09-27 18:56:36 | Null row vs. row of nulls in plpgsql |
| Previous Message | Mark Mielke | 2008-09-27 16:13:24 | Re: PostgreSQL future ideas |