On 09/02/2014 06:41 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> On 09/02/2014 02:47 PM, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa wrote:
>
>> Yeah, we differ there. I think having an Oracle compatibility layer
>> in PostgreSQL would be the-next-big-thing we could have. Oracle is has
>> orders of magnitude bigger user base than postgres has; and having the
>> ability to attract them would bring us many many more users which, in
>> turn, would benefit us all very significantly.
>>
>> It would be my #1 priority to do in postgres (but yes, I know
>> -guess- how hard and what resources that would require). But dreaming is
>> free :)
>
> Oracle compatibility certainly has merit, I just don't see it as useful
> for core. I would be far more interested in MSSQL compatibility
> honestly. That said, Postgres itself is a rockstar and I think we can
> make our own case without having to copy others.
PL/pgSQL's syntax was modelled to look like PL/SQL. Which is a Ada/COBOL
lookalike.
Instead of trying to mimic what it was or a T-SQL thing instead ...
maybe it is time to come up with a true PostgreSQL specific PL for a change?
Just for the sake of being something new, and not a copy of some old
opossum, that's rotting like road kill on the side of the highway for a
decade already.
Jan
--
Jan Wieck
Senior Software Engineer
http://slony.info