Re: [HACKERS] PL/Lang (was: Priorities for 6.6)

Michael Robinson wrote:

> The reason people want an embedded procedural language is because procedures
> in such a language have access to the guts of the backend, and can perform
> many operations much more efficiently than having to go push everything
> through the FE->SQL->compiler->executor->tuple list->FE->lather->rinse->repeat
> bottleneck.

    That's  one reason. Another one is that you can create stored
    procedures     that     get     triggered      on      events
    (INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE)  and can perform referential integrity
    checks and other things then.

    Some of them  could  also  be  done  by  constraints  (if  we
    sometimes  have  the  rule  system  powerful enought to do it
    correctly). Some can't.

>
> I decided that the proper solution was to expose all the internal guts of
> the backend through a proper CORBA interface.  That way, any language with
> an ORB could act as an embedded procedural language.

    And how does your CORBA get triggered  in  the  case  someone
    uses  the  good  old psql? Or MUST everything then talk CORBA
    and you disable any other kind  of  access  completely?  Note
    that  for  a trigger that has to ensure referential integrity
    it's not enough to say "it will be triggered if the user uses
    the  correct  access  path".  It  has to ensure that the user
    doesn't use the wrong one!


Jan

--

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
#========================================= wieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck) #