From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Álvaro Hernández Tortosa <aht(at)nosys(dot)es> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PL/pgSQL 2 |
Date: | 2014-09-01 19:08:28 |
Message-ID: | CAFj8pRDim3cD0SazuWj6bEbaggY4EZg+BTEG7cBrOgzC=yjyaA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2014-09-01 20:58 GMT+02:00 Álvaro Hernández Tortosa <aht(at)nosys(dot)es>:
>
> On 01/09/14 20:42, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> =?UTF-8?B?w4FsdmFybyBIZXJuw6FuZGV6IFRvcnRvc2E=?= <aht(at)nosys(dot)es> writes:
>>
>>> What I can add is that, if Postgres is to devote resources to a new
>>> language, I would plan it with a broader scope. What would attract most
>>> users? Would it bring non postgres users to Postgres? What could be one
>>> of the killer features of any next version? My trivial answer to most of
>>> these questions is: PL/SQL.
>>>
>> By that I suppose you mean "I wish it would act just like Oracle".
>> The problem with such a wish is that a lot of the incompatibilities
>> with Oracle are functions of the core SQL engine, not of the PL.
>> plpgsql already is about as close to PL/SQL as it's possible to get
>> without changing core Postgres behavior --- or at least, that was
>> the original design desire, and I don't think that it's failed in
>> any large degree.
>>
>> regards, tom lane
>>
>
> It's true that some of the incompatibilities are the core engine,
> internal functions and so on, and that the plpgsql design goal was to
> achieve "similarity". But similarity is not code compatibility, and afaik,
> plpgsql is not code compatible with PL/SQL. Having 1:1 code compatibility,
> if possible, is a very well first step, only followed by the core
> functionalities you mention.
>
> If postgres were going for a new language, why not implement one
> which, having the other suggested functionality, also has 1:1 PL/SQL code
> compatibility? I'm sure it's no trivial task, but one highly desirable.
>
It is false expectation - language is only one part .. and plpgsql isn't to
far. There are different system of modules, different system of custom
aggregates, mainly with PL/SQL is very complex library dbms_xxxx. This
library is maybe more complex than current Postgres base.
It is task for commercial project --- not all Postgres users need a Oracle
compatibility layer. Next, I am sure, so it is in contradiction to Joel
proposal.
Regards
Pavel
>
> Regards,
>
> Álvaro
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Petr Jelinek | 2014-09-01 19:29:41 | Re: Built-in binning functions |
Previous Message | Álvaro Hernández Tortosa | 2014-09-01 18:58:02 | Re: PL/pgSQL 2 |