Re: PL/pgSQL 2

2014-09-01 13:30 GMT+02:00 Joel Jacobson <joel(at)trustly(dot)com>:

> On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > The likelihood of us now knowing all the things that we want to break
> > rigth now seems about zero. There *will* be further ones. If we go with
> > the approach of creating new language versions for all of them we'll end
> > up with a completely unmaintainable mess. For PG devs, application dev
> > and DBAs.
>
> PL/pgSQL was added in 1998 (16 years ago).
>
> Compared this with again Python:
> 1994 Python 1.0
> 2000 Python 2.0 (6 years later)
> 2008 Python 3.0 (8 years later)
>
> Of course we don't know all the things we want to break in the *future*,
> but there is a good chance all users of PL/pgSQL know what they want
> to change *today*,
> thanks to the 16 years of active development in the language.
>
> In 16 years from now, maybe there is a need for PL/pgSQL 3, or maybe
> not, who knows.
>
>
For lot of people is Python3 big fail - and it can be much more dangerous
for Postgres than for much more larger Python community.

I don't see a necessity to do again. I have very good knowledge about users
in Czech, and probably only I know a limits of plpgsql.

I am thinking so some enhancing of plpgsql (extensions, extra errors, extra
warnings) is possible.

Regards

Pavel

>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>