Re: Best Procedural Language?

From: "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "John Sidney-Woollett" <johnsw(at)wardbrook(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Best Procedural Language?
Date: 2006-08-04 13:29:50
Message-ID: b42b73150608040629s33d6c0a6g61335796a15e4cec@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On 8/3/06, John Sidney-Woollett <johnsw(at)wardbrook(dot)com> wrote:
> I'd say that the biggest benefit of pl/pgsql for postgres is that it is
> so close to Oracle's own procedural language. This makes the job of
> porting from Oracle to postgres *nearly* trivial.

while this is true, pl/pgsql has a lot of other advantages wrt other
sp languages:
* first class, non dynamic sql: cuts code, complexity and errors down
50% and increases security (or at least makes being secure easier)
* unified error system: perl brings perl errors, java brings java errors, etc
* cursors/refcursors: you can pass anonymous refcursors between
pl/pgsql functions directly. of course, this can be emulated in
dynamic plpgsql, but it is awkward and error prone. also, different
cursor mechanisms bring huge flexiblity in tight syntax.
* named parameters
* and most of all, pl/pgsql makes programming fun. ok, this is
entirely subjective and inconsequential, but it works for me. :-)

merlin

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Wayne Conrad 2006-08-04 13:36:03 Re: PITR Questions
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-08-04 12:59:51 Re: Locale/encoding problem/question