On Sun, 22 Aug 2004, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
> PL/Java is a good example since it's one of two server side Java
> solutions. The other one is PL/J. While they provide the same
> functionality, they are fundamentally different in implementation and
> the best choice is likely to vary depending on the intended use (this is
> b.t.w. very true for different replication solutions also, so the
> remainder of this argument is not specific to server side java).
Since I (and I don't believe anyone else on core) uses Java ... shouldn't
it be up to the developer of the PL/J* modules to do this? We can't weigh
which one is better then the other, as we don't use it ...
Also, how does someone support something that they don't use? Again, that
is the developer of PL/J*'s job to do, not ours ...
> Should yet another solution pop up, well then the contributor of that
> one has to motivate why it too should be supported. Perhaps the
> motivation is that it's very similar to an existing solution but it
> shows superior performance and stability. When that happens (and is
> proven), the existing solution is replaced. The contributor of the new
> solution must of course ensure ease of migration.
At that rate, we'll have to distribute via CD to anyone that wants
PostgreSQL ... cause downloading it via FTP won't be a viable option
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
In response to
pgsql-general by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2004-08-23 03:40:00|
|Subject: Re: Unsupported 3rd-party solutions (Was: Few questions |
|Previous:||From: Jim Worke||Date: 2004-08-22 23:14:52|
|Subject: Re: Few questions on postgresql (dblink, 2pc, clustering)|