From: | Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jonah H(dot) Harris <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "David Fetter" <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "Satoshi Nagayasu" <nagayasus(at)nttdata(dot)co(dot)jp>, "Thomas Hallgren" <thomas(at)tada(dot)se> |
Subject: | Re: Three weeks left until feature freeze |
Date: | 2006-07-13 14:31:01 |
Message-ID: | D845181A-D18F-465A-AA32-978B5FD79D7F@fastcrypt.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 13-Jul-06, at 9:29 AM, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> On 7/12/06, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> > I don't really think anyone would want to run both, but
>> > that's just my opinion.
>>
>> On what grounds do you not think that?
>
> Too much Java overhead on one database and PL/J isn't that stable.
> I've run into several crash problems with it before.
>
>> PL/J uses an external JVM, PL/Java one that is running in the
>> backend process. (Or maybe it was the other way 'round, I'm too
>> tired to remember tonight.)
>
> While tired, you're still correct :)
>
>> That's a really fundamental difference that makes them suited for
>> very different
>> applications; not to mention the resulting different licensing
>> scenarios.
>
> Not really, both require a JVM so the same licensing still applies.
>
>> The points that have been made in this thread about PL/J not being
>> actively maintained are important, but other than that objection,
>> I can see no reason that PL/J wouldn't have an equal claim to
>> inclusion
>> in core.
>
> I'm being objective here, and PL/J is not nearly as stable or
> well-maintained... that means a lot to me or to anyone who looks at
> using a Java PL.
Doesn't EDB sponsor pl/java ? I would think that might make you
somewhat subjective ?
That being said, pl-j is not as mature as pl/java, however I don't
believe that is a valid reason for exclusion.
Open source projects by their nature gain maturity by exposure.
> Do we intend to ship both and say that one is less
> capable? Have you used either of them? Don't get me wrong, I like
> PL/J in concept... but it's just not even close to production-ready
> yet. I know of no one using PL/J in production and about 40 or so
> people using PL/Java.
>
>> Perhaps more, because it gives us an extra layer of insulation
>> from JVM licensing questions.
>
> Again, I don't believe so. I'd like to hear how Dave thinks so,
> though.
I didn't say this
>
> --
> Jonah H. Harris, Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1300
> EnterpriseDB Corporation | fax: 732.331.1301
> 33 Wood Ave S, 2nd Floor | jharris(at)enterprisedb(dot)com
> Iselin, New Jersey 08830 | http://www.enterprisedb.com/
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jonah H. Harris | 2006-07-13 14:36:36 | Re: Three weeks left until feature freeze |
Previous Message | Dave Cramer | 2006-07-13 14:26:07 | Re: Three weeks left until feature freeze |