Re: [GENERAL] stored procedure revisited
От | amy cheng |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [GENERAL] stored procedure revisited |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 19991014002834.44920.qmail@hotmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Список | pgsql-general |
datamart is important for web. That is why HISTORICALLY, mySQL is so popular. BTW, I withdraw the opinion on mySQL, IMHO, it is too limited, no mention its not-generous-enough license. IF I have time, I will do it myself *sigh*. >From: Yin-So Chen <ychen1@uswest.net> >To: pgsql-general@postgreSQL.org >Subject: Re: [GENERAL] stored procedure revisited >Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 15:52:28 -0700 > >amy cheng wrote: > > > > C is good, and in a sense, for OSS we should encourage more C >"scripting" > > and "hacking" than script scripting. (perl and PL/pgSQL actually is >"bad" in > > this sense). Because IF everybody use C, the use and development will > > inherently related and the dev. speed will > > accelate exponentially. However, C/C++ is difficult (I use > > both C and perl, so I know it). Also, as GOOD excuse, C/C++ > > is not safe. So, we need PL SP. > >Well, not everyone in this world can work in the C level (I certainly >included myself here), and talking about languages is getting awefully >close to advocacy :) But just think this way though, if C is the route >to go, then why not assembly? When you have an answer of why not, you >also have an answer for C as well :) But OTOH, that's why C programmers >have nothing to fear about all the VB programmers out there... Because >there are jobs only C is appropriate. I am sure you all know this so >ignore my mumbling :) > > > > > However, I would like to see data warehouse (or more moderately and > > accurately data mart) support also -- the point: the priority? > > > >So, what is the priority? I will argue that SP is a higher priority >than data warehousing. The reason? More people would benefit from SP >than from data warehousing. Moreover, SP will also draw database >administrator's mind-share for PG. Who's going to work with the >database? Administrators & application developers, mostly. And if >there are features which most administrators or developers would >consider lacking, it would be a reason for them to look elsewhere. >W/out them pitching for PG, would PG compete well against commercial >databases? SPI is great and all, but there is a reason why a PL is also >developed. Since the PL is here, then SP is the next logical step :) > >Regards, > >yin-so chen > >************ > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: