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

Re: plpython3

From: Nathan Boley <npboley(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: James William Pye <lists(at)jwp(dot)name>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: plpython3
Date: 2010-02-01 20:01:28
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> On the basis of all of the foregoing, I don't think we can consider
> this patch further for this CommitFest and will update
> accordingly.

FWIW, I am very excited about this patch and would be happy to review
it but have been very busy over the past month. If I can promise a
review by Thursday morning could we keep it active? Hopefully, at the
very least, I can provide some useful feedback and spawn some
community interest.

I am worried that there is a bit of a chicken and an egg problem with
this patch. I code nearly exclusively in python and C, but I have
often found pl/python to be very unwieldy.  For this reason I often
use pl/perl or pl/pgsql for problems that, outside of postgres, I
would always use python. From the documentation, this patch seems like
an enormous step in the right direction.


In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Joshua D. DrakeDate: 2010-02-01 20:12:41
Subject: Re: plpython3
Previous:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2010-02-01 19:40:02
Subject: Re: Hot Standby: Relation-specific deferred conflict resolution

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