| From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: scheduler in core |
| Date: | 2010-02-22 20:15:03 |
| Message-ID: | b42b73151002221215n1d88f54eo257c110c8b087d50@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 2:29 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> Merlin Moncure escribió:
>
>> Like I noted above, what people want to schedule is going to be stored
>> procedures. Having both would virtually eliminate the need for
>> scripting outside the database, which is a pretty big deal since
>> external scripts are a real pain to keep cross platform. Since
>> there's probably a lot of overlapping problems in those two features,
>> why not tackle both at once?
>
> Divide and conquer?
When I meant 'tackle', it is more of a 'come to an understanding'
thing. Normally I would agree with you anyways, but I think what most
people would want to schedule would be stored procedures (sorry to
continually repeat myself here, but I really think this should be
critical to any scheduling proposal), not functions or ad hoc scripts.
merlin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-02-22 20:24:54 | Re: Reason why set-value functions not allowed in GREATEST(), etc? |
| Previous Message | Jaime Casanova | 2010-02-22 20:10:15 | Re: tie user processes to postmaster was:(Re: [HACKERS] scheduler in core) |