Re: [HACKERS] RustgreSQL

On 8 January 2017 at 21:50, Jim Nasby  wrote:
> Somewhat related to that... it would be useful if Postgres had "fenced"
> functions; functions that ran in a separate process and only talked to a
> backend via a well defined API (such as libpq). There's two major advantages
> that would give us:

The problem with this is that any of the "interesting" extensions need
to use the server API. That is, they need to be able to do things like
throw errors, expand toast data, etc.

IMHO just about anything you could do in an external process would be
something you could much more easily and conveniently do in the
client. And it would be more flexible and scalable as well as it's a
lot easier to add more clients than it is to scale up the database.

That said, there were several pl language implementations that worked
this way. IIRC one of the Java pl languages ran in a separate Java
process.

I think the solution to the problem you're describing is the project
formerly known as NaCl
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Native_Client

-- 
greg