Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: PostgreSQL future ideas

From: "Douglas McNaught" <doug(at)mcnaught(dot)org>
To: "Mark Mielke" <mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc>
Cc: "Chris Browne" <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL future ideas
Date: 2008-09-27 16:37:31
Message-ID: 5ded07e00809270937y377e06eeo994468068be1990f@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-generalpgsql-hackers
On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 12:13 PM, Mark Mielke <mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc> wrote:
> If
> some parts of PostgreSQL are not performance bottlenecks, and they are
> extremely complicated to write in C, and very easy to write in something
> else common and simple (I've never used LUA myself?), I imagine it would be
> acceptable to the community.

As long as they can expose their interfaces using the standard PG
function call interface, and use the documented SPI mechanism to talk
to the rest of the back end.  Stuff that hooks into undocumented or
unstable parts of the code would be much less viable.

-Doug

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-09-27 18:56:36
Subject: Null row vs. row of nulls in plpgsql
Previous:From: Mark MielkeDate: 2008-09-27 16:13:24
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL future ideas

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Martin GaintyDate: 2008-09-27 16:44:46
Subject: Re: sequence... my nightmare :-(
Previous:From: Alain RogerDate: 2008-09-27 16:21:26
Subject: Re: sequence... my nightmare :-(

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group