Re: Why isn't Java support part of Postgresql core?

On 19/09/2014 4:30 AM, Szymon Guz wrote:
> I think all people here agree that adding another package to linux
> repository or an option to windows installer is OK. What some people
> disagree here is adding jre to the core postgres.

So we're in agreement.

> Oh, and btw, I've got a package named postgresql-9.3-pljava-gcj in my
> linux repo.

Good to know, but for now I'm developing primarily on Windows machines.

>> If there is a programmer who cannot install jvm/jdk on its own
>> (which is a couple of clicks on windows and linux) then I'm sure
>> that writing stored procerures in java will be even too difficult.
>
> Installing a public JVM is easy. Binding it to pl/java is not. By
> bundling a private JRE we control the default installation path
> and can therefore pre-configure pl/java to look for it in that
> location.
>
>
> The best solution would be to make different languages, like pljava6,
> pljava7, pljava8, with library path configured in the create extension
> command. This way we could use different jvms and library versions for
> each database.

That's fine with me.

>
> I'm not taking this option away from you. Power users can still do
> what they want. I'm just trying to facilitate deployment users who
> are fine with the default/typical configuration.
>
>
> So in fact you propose to create another option in the windows
> installer only, right?

Correct.

Gili