Re: Packages: Again

Hello again,
well, I didn't want to tell you to match in PostgreSQL the technical debt. If I made it look so, sorry for my bad english.
No, a "free clone of Oracle" isn't my intention. I don't want to convince Oracle evangelists to use PostgreSQL. This is time wasted. But I'd prefer a project where the community is thriving and the more members it has the better.
My top point on the list above is making the way away from Oracle smoother and that's ways easier when you don't have to argue against arguments like "PG doesn't have packages" including that what was mentioned as pro arguments for packages by Tom Kyte. This is the best way to stay in a discussion about that single topic and have _no_ chance to show them the benefits.

Regards,Wolfgang

Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> schrieb am 10:41 Freitag, 13.Januar 2017:

2017-01-13 10:11 GMT+01:00 Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>:

On 13 January 2017 at 16:49, Wolfgang Wilhelm <wolfgang20121964(at)yahoo(dot)de> wrote:
> - Devs just don't want to change (some) code. Everybody seems to have code
> with huge technical debt which is best not to be touched. This code should
> have an easy "move code from Oracle to PostgreSQL", best case by not forcing
> the devs to look at this scary code.

That's kind of offsetting their technical debt onto us, though, and by
extension other PostgreSQL users.

Support compatibility stuff we don't need, that doesn't really benefit
other users, just so they can do less porting and cleanup work.

I'm 100% for implementing _useful_ features based on users' migration
needs from other DBMSes. Even ones that aren't that useful, but come
at low cost to us. But introducing whole new systems to make porting a
little easier does not thrill me.

Also, that's where EDB's market is, and I don't personally feel any
desire to push community PostgreSQL in the Oracle compatibility
direction. Porting tools, sure. Useful features, sure. Direct
compatibility, meh.

I guess what I'm saying is that if someone wants PostgreSQL to have
packages, they need to have:

* A design that can fit in with PostgreSQL
* Solid benefits beyond "makes life easier for Oracle users" to
justify each feature/change
* Funding/time to make it happen

So far, I haven't seen anyone with one of those, let alone all three.

+1
Regards
Pavel 

--
 Craig Ringer                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/ mailpref/pgsql-hackers