Re: Simple postgresql.conf wizard
От | Magnus Hagander |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Simple postgresql.conf wizard |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 490ED6C7.3090801@hagander.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Simple postgresql.conf wizard (Hannu Krosing <hannu@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hannu Krosing wrote: >> If you do a python version, others will write versions in other >> languages. > > Yeah, if python is not accepted as contrib, then it can probably be > rewritten in C once it has stabilized enough. It could. The question is if it makes sense to write something like this in C, really ;) It might get slightly more portable, at the expense of a lot more work. I see no reason why we should on principle reject a python based program from contrib. We already have stuff there in shellscript which is actually *less* portable... As long as it's not a core utility needed to get postgresql working, I think it's fine. >> I personally don't really care; Perl's main advantage is >> that it's pre-installed on more OSes than Python is. > > I think most (if not all) modern OS's standard setup includes both perl > and python. Except of course windows which probably includes neither. Windows ships with neither of the two languages (and you *really* don't want to write it in vbscript or jscript which is what it does ship with - other than .BAT). But they both have easy installers you can use to get it in there - I don't see this as any difference between the two. And I'll second the comment that I think most reasonably modern platforms will ship with both of them. AFAIK, many of the newer linuxen use python based stuff as part of the core installer functionality, for example. //Magnus
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: