| From: | Thomas Hallgren <thhal(at)mailblocks(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL in the press again |
| Date: | 2004-11-13 19:58:00 |
| Message-ID: | 41966748.5010006@mailblocks.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Yes but I believe even you would agree that their are programming
> languages that are better for certain tasks than others. The use of
> java as a replication engine for PostgreSQL seems, well... incorrect.
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> We definitely concur with that, which is why we are re-writing it ...
> going to Java, as Andrew has mentioned, was *not* a design decision that
> we made, but was made for us :(
>
Now I get really curious. Why would Java be a bad choice for a
replication engine? I would consider it an excellent choice, provided of
course that the people tasked with the implementation had the right
skills. C-JDBC for instance, is written in Java.
Regards,
Thomas Hallgren
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2004-11-13 20:21:12 | Re: PostgreSQL in the press again |
| Previous Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2004-11-13 17:45:50 | Re: PostgreSQL in the press again |