Re: Packages, inner subprograms, and parameterizable anonymous blocks for PL/pgSQL

On 12/16/21 12:36, Bryn Llewellyn wrote:
> //
>> /adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com <mailto:adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com> wrote:
>> /
>>

>>
>> Not following. To be exposed they have to exist and that is not the
>> case in the community Postgres. The relevant question would seem to
>> be, how do I get these features built?
>>
>>> /Bryn continued:/
>>>
>>> * Full disclosure: I was the product manager for PL/SQL, working at

>
> Oops. I did a typo. I’d meant to write “I’d be very interested in
> *reading* any ordinary prose…”

That I figured out:)

>
> I can’t parse your “To be exposed they have to exist and that is not the
> case…” Do you mean that the rumor that I heard is wrong and that nobody
> has said to the Postgres community that they’ve embarked on, or at least
> are interested in, implementing what I’m asking about?

Not that I know of. What was being danced around is that Oracle
compatibility is a key feature of EDB's business model:

https://www.enterprisedb.com/products/edb-postgres-advanced-server-secure-ha-oracle-compatible

>
> I had assumed that the answer to “How do I get these features built?”
> was “Write a C implementation and submit it for consideration”. But I
> can’t do that. The obvious Google searches like “Submit enhancement
> request for PostgreSQL” turn up only informal emails to lists like this.
> Is there a better answer?
>
Not really, though if you want to bring this up --hackers is the best list.

--
Adrian Klaver
adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com