2008/9/27 Douglas McNaught <doug(at)mcnaught(dot)org>:
> On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 12:13 PM, Mark Mielke <mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc> wrote:
>> 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.
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
I think that C is the best language for Postgresql. C++ has a little
thinks that make not good for performance.
Why people want to make more understable code touching the language?.
Simplify documentation for programmmers. Thats was the idea in the beggining.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2008-09-29 22:26:30|
|Subject: Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches|
|Previous:||From: Stefan Kaltenbrunner||Date: 2008-09-29 19:54:42|
|Subject: Re: parallel pg_restore - WIP patch|
pgsql-general by date
|Next:||From: Greg Smith||Date: 2008-09-29 21:49:26|
|Subject: Re: pg_start_backup() takes too long|
|Previous:||From: Scott Marlowe||Date: 2008-09-29 20:25:58|
|Subject: Re: Counting unique rows as an aggregate.|