| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com |
| Cc: | James William Pye <lists(at)jwp(dot)name>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: plpython3 |
| Date: | 2010-01-13 21:46:26 |
| Message-ID: | 1263419186.30626.17.camel@vanquo.pezone.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On ons, 2010-01-13 at 13:33 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> The only thing I am currently looking for is an objective review of the
> patch based on the benefits it provides.
Right, but I was opining that such a vague feature listing is not
adequate for that.
> I can tell you that if the Pye
> patch provides stack trace capability and the current PL does not. That
> right there is enough for me to push a +1 for review and possible
> inclusion.
That is the case.
> If you feel what James is saying is actually trite and more buzzword
> compliant I welcome the opportunity to see a comparative of the current
> status of PL/Python versus the Pye patch from you. If nothing else it is
> a learning opportunity for all involved.
There was extensive discussion about some of the design decisions
upthread, so any reviewer should review those. It may end up being a
agree-to-disagree situation.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-01-13 21:47:37 | Re: primary key display in psql |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-01-13 21:42:36 | Re: patch to implement ECPG side tracing / tracking ... |