Re: PostgreSQL vs. SQL Server, Oracle

On 10/11/06, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> 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.

True.

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

True, however, it goes to show the authors level of knowledge when
researching and churning out the book.  You'd think there at least
would've been a mention of extending the procedural language.

Of course, Oracle supports C and Java stored procedures and Microsoft
supports procedures with the Common Language Runtime... so I don't
think it's a fair comparison to say, "PostgreSQL can do it and others
can't" just because they didn't mention PL extensibility.

Just my 2 cents.

--
Jonah H. Harris, Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1300
EnterpriseDB Corporation            | fax: 732.331.1301
33 Wood Ave S, 2nd Floor            | jharris@enterprisedb.com
Iselin, New Jersey 08830            | http://www.enterprisedb.com/