Re: PostgreSQL future ideas

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: "A(dot)M(dot)" <agentm(at)themactionfaction(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL future ideas
Date: 2008-09-26 15:52:22
Message-ID: 48DD0536.7030501@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

A.M. wrote:
>
>
> Speaking of language choice, no one said that _all_ the source code
> would need to be rewritten. It would be nice, for example, if
> PostgreSQL rewrote the current GUC system with a glue language like
> Lua (which is also very C-like).
>
>

No it wouldn't. All it would mean is that you'd need developers fluent
in both languages.

If this were a greenfields project we might well now make choices other
than those made in the past, but that doesn't mean we should constantly
revisit those decisions.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dianne Yumul 2008-09-26 16:23:21 Re: Stroring html form settings
Previous Message Tom Lane 2008-09-26 15:47:03 Re: types for C function composites

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stefan Kaltenbrunner 2008-09-26 16:03:20 lock contention on parallel COPY ?
Previous Message A.M. 2008-09-26 15:39:11 Re: PostgreSQL future ideas