Re: Packages, inner subprograms, and parameterizable anonymous blocks for PL/pgSQL
От | Adrian Klaver |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Packages, inner subprograms, and parameterizable anonymous blocks for PL/pgSQL |
Дата | |
Msg-id | c60ff3df-b140-8cc4-83e4-5ab739eda597@aklaver.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Packages, inner subprograms, and parameterizable anonymous blocks for PL/pgSQL (Bryn Llewellyn <bryn@yugabyte.com>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
On 12/16/21 12:36, Bryn Llewellyn wrote: > // >> /adrian.klaver@aklaver.com <mailto:adrian.klaver@aklaver.com> wrote: >> / >> >> >> Not following. To be exposed they have to exist and that is not the >> case in the community Postgres. The relevant question would seem to >> be, how do I get these features built? >> >>> /Bryn continued:/ >>> >>> * Full disclosure: I was the product manager for PL/SQL, working at > > Oops. I did a typo. I’d meant to write “I’d be very interested in > *reading* any ordinary prose…” That I figured out:) > > I can’t parse your “To be exposed they have to exist and that is not the > case…” Do you mean that the rumor that I heard is wrong and that nobody > has said to the Postgres community that they’ve embarked on, or at least > are interested in, implementing what I’m asking about? Not that I know of. What was being danced around is that Oracle compatibility is a key feature of EDB's business model: https://www.enterprisedb.com/products/edb-postgres-advanced-server-secure-ha-oracle-compatible > > I had assumed that the answer to “How do I get these features built?” > was “Write a C implementation and submit it for consideration”. But I > can’t do that. The obvious Google searches like “Submit enhancement > request for PostgreSQL” turn up only informal emails to lists like this. > Is there a better answer? > Not really, though if you want to bring this up --hackers is the best list. -- Adrian Klaver adrian.klaver@aklaver.com
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: