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

On 18-09-2014 17:58, cowwoc wrote:
> On 18/09/2014 4:26 PM, David G Johnston [via PostgreSQL] wrote:
>> ​ "only PostgreSQL uses it" ... PostgreSQL doesn't use Java.
>
> I don't think it makes a difference from a licensing point of view.
> The point is that the JRE is not used to run multiple distinct
> applications.
>
>> ​Also, there is no functional difference between a public and a
>> private JRE.​ Pointing pl/java to a private JRE is no more or less
>> secure than pointing it to whatever public JRE the administrator
>> happens to have installed.
>

I've been reading all this stuff.. and I have one simple question:

"dll" doesn't means "dynamic linked library"? Why does PostgreSQL needs
to statically link to it?

How does all those browsers link to different Java virtual machines?
Don't they have a dynamic link library that makes a interface to them?
Can't we use similar approach in PostgreSQL? So each one could use the
desired JVM, without need to stick to this or that.

Just my 2c... please forgive me if I'm throwing disparate words.

Regards,

Edson