On 10/15/2012 04:34 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 3:26 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> To be perfectly frank, I think that's exactly where we ought to be
>> going. Oracle and Microsoft both did it, so why are we convinced it's
>> a bad idea? One of the huge problems with PL/pgsql is that every SQL
>> expression in there has to be passed to the executor separately, which
>> is painfully slow.
> I'm a bit lost. I would think pl/pgsql is precisely the same as
> Oracle's pl/sql and MS's T-SQL. I see the complaint you have as a
> purely implementation detail. I don't think pl/pgsql is the best
> implemented part of Postgres but I don't see how integrating it into
> the core is going to automatically make it all wonderful either.
>
> Fwiw my experience has consistently been that life got better whenever
> I moved anything I had implemented as PL/SQL or PL/pgsql into client
> code in Perl or Python.
Just curious - why did you move it into _client_ code ?
Why not pl/perl or pl/python ?
Was performance not a concern and it was easier (administratively?) to
manage it on the client side ?
---------
Hannu
>