Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: plpython3

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, James Pye <lists(at)jwp(dot)name>, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: plpython3
Date: 2010-01-13 17:47:18
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 2010-01-12 at 20:06 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > So it seems to me that the threshold question for this patch is - do
> > we think it's a good idea to maintain two implementations of PL/python
> > in core?
> Not really, no.  This is why we need PGAN ;-)
> If the new implementation is *better* that the existing PL/python, I
> could see eventually replacing it.  It wouldn't be the first time that a
> rewrite exceeded the original tool.

I think it is important to remember that the current version of
PL/python is pretty weak compared to its counter parts (Specifically
PL/Perl). If the new version, is adequately written to community
standards and increases  PL/Python's capabilities we need to seriously
consider it.

If we can address any issues with this module, let's commit it as
Pl/pythonng3 or something.

Anyway, I am +1 on reviewing this patch for viability.

I would love to never touch plPerl for advanced procedures again.

Joshua D. Drake

-- Major Contributor
Command Prompt, Inc: - 503.667.4564
Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering
Respect is earned, not gained through arbitrary and repetitive use or Mr. or Sir.

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2010-01-13 17:53:11
Subject: Re: plpython3
Previous:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2010-01-13 17:12:25
Subject: Re: xml2 still essential for us

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group