| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Gevik Babakhani" <pgdev(at)xs4all(dot)nl> |
| Cc: | "'Andrew Dunstan'" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "'Joshua Drake'" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "'Jonah H(dot) Harris'" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>, "'Dave Page'" <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, "'PGSQL Hackers'" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, david(at)fetter(dot)org, josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL future ideas |
| Date: | 2008-09-20 00:02:59 |
| Message-ID: | 28772.1221868979@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
I'm surprised no one pointed out that Postgres has *already* been ported
to a new language once. It was originally written in Lisp, and was
rewritten in C sometime in the Berkeley years. (Anyone know exactly
when or by whom? I don't.) You can still see the effects of that
origin in the system's liking for list-based data structures.
But the code base was an order of magnitude smaller and simpler back
then, meaning that a fresh port would be at least an order of magnitude
harder. Like other respondents, I'm not seeing where we'd get benefits
commensurate with the cost.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michelle Konzack | 2008-09-20 00:05:52 | [OT] CSS Mailinglist? |
| Previous Message | Gevik Babakhani | 2008-09-19 23:03:50 | Re: PostgreSQL future ideas |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | KaiGai Kohei | 2008-09-20 00:57:16 | Re: Proposal of SE-PostgreSQL patches (for CommitFest:Sep) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-09-19 23:30:21 | Re: FSM patch - performance test |