Re: Supported languages
| От | Thomas Hallgren |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Supported languages |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 40E35045.2070207@mailblocks.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Supported languages (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Supported languages
|
| Список | pgsql-advocacy |
Josh Berkus wrote: >Is either PL/Java or PL/J ready for prime-time? As far as I'm concerned, >any PL which is "production ready" should be in the same place. > >However, I'd the impression that both you and Gavin were still bug-hunting. > > > I have no known bugs at present but only a limited crowd of early adopters uses Pl/Java. Consequently it has not been thoroughly tested and to say that it's "production ready" would probably be a bit optimistic. I would be very interested in working together with someone who could write demanding tests. It's a known fact that tests written by outsiders often find more bugs than tests written by the product developers. From a feature standpoint, I think Pl/Java is ready. It includes fully functional support for functions, triggers, complex types (parameters and return values), returning sets, a JDBC driver on top of SPI, deployment/undeployment descriptors that executes SQL code, and more. Right now I'm aligning Pl/Java with the upcoming 7.5 release and adding gcj 3.4 as a possible choice of jvm (gcj is non proprietary and fits right in from several other aspects as well). I guess that "production ready" is a somewhat fuzzy measure. What would it, in your opinion, take to claim that Pl/Java has reached it? Any advice on how to get there? Kind regards, Thomas Hallgren
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: