Re: Oid registry

From: Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Oid registry
Date: 2012-09-27 08:21:16
Message-ID: CAAZKuFbgn7vewahG137bE9rrOY-mWcBZhYaA_zNMUu7Uq6CwQQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 21:18 -0700, Daniel Farina wrote:
>> The gap between
>> pre-JSON-in-the-standard-library in Python, Ruby, et al and
>> post-JSON-in-stdlib was much smaller.
>
> Except in Python they renamed the thing.

By 'smaller' I mean the difference in capability between promoted to
the Python stdlib is comparatively smaller than data types and
operators from being promoted to core in Postgres, and the main reason
for that is that people can compose on top of Postgres-core
functionality, but those extensions themselves are not very useful in
further composition. The extensibility at the first level is great.

There exists an entirely livable alternative-future/present where
Python never promoted the (simple)json library into the stdlib. The
same could not be said for Postgres extensions as they exist today.

--
fdr

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hannu Krosing 2012-09-27 08:44:06 Re: Switching timeline over streaming replication
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2012-09-27 05:50:56 Re: Re: [WIP] Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation