On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Yeah. I was wondering if anyone was gung-ho enough about this to
>> implement some kind of library that both programs could draw on.
>> It probably wouldn't be super-hard, if we could agree on a rough design.
> It seems to me that the Mo Betta answer would be to implement the
> fabled "stored procedure" language, that has, as its distinctive, the
> capability to control transactions. That would have the capability of
> being used in places other than just inside psql.
> And it would be a good way for scripting things like specialized
> vacuum and analyze regimens, which cannot be done inside stored
> functions today.
Well, I'm all good with that, too, but am not fired up about either
one to implement it myself. So I think it's going to come down to
what the person doing the work feels most strongly about.
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Alvaro Herrera||Date: 2011-04-19 16:48:16|
|Subject: Re: Build farm coverage for isolation tests|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2011-04-19 16:32:28|
|Subject: Re: [JDBC] JDBC connections to 9.1 |