Re: PostgreSQL vs. SQL Server, Oracle

Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-10-11 at 09:41 -0700, David Fetter wrote:
>> "First, the ability to write functions and stored procedures is
>> somewhat more limited than you would get with Oracle's PL/SQL or
>> Sybase's T-SQL."
>>
>> I don't know which languages they were looking at, but it's hard to
>> imagine how PL/SQL or T-SQL outdid PL/Perl, PL/PythonU, PL/Ruby,
>> PL/sh, etc. from a flexibility perspective.
>>
> 
> Or C, for that matter. Doesn't get much less "limited" than allowing C
> functions with a very powerful SPI. It's hard to argue with them when
> they don't provide a single example, however.

O.k. guys, the article wasn't perfect but it was a heck of a lot more
fair an accurate then what we usually see from the press.

I have already written the editor with a note about the misconception of
our procedural languages.

Joshua D. Drake



> 
> Regards,
> 	Jeff Davis
> 
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
>        choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
>        match
> 


-- 

   === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
   Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
             http://www.commandprompt.com/