Re: Plans for 9.1, Grouping Sets, disabling multiqueries, contrib module for string, plpgpsm, preload dictionaries
От
Pavel Stehule
Тема
Re: Plans for 9.1, Grouping Sets, disabling multiqueries,
contrib module for string, plpgpsm, preload dictionaries
Дата
Msg-id
162867791003011251r7e4b7af7x8c5ac40aa5f3b18b@mail.gmail.com
Ответ на
Re: Plans for 9.1, Grouping Sets, disabling
multiqueries, contrib module for string, plpgpsm, preload dictionaries (Peter Eisentraut)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Plans for 9.1, Grouping Sets, disabling multiqueries, contrib module
for string, plpgpsm, preload dictionaries Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
Re: Plans for 9.1, Grouping Sets, disabling
multiqueries, contrib module for string, plpgpsm, preload dictionaries Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
Re: Plans for 9.1, Grouping Sets, disabling multiqueries,
contrib module for string, plpgpsm, preload dictionaries Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
Re: Plans for 9.1, Grouping Sets, disabling
multiqueries, contrib module for string, plpgpsm, preload dictionaries Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
Re: Plans for 9.1, Grouping Sets, disabling multiqueries,
contrib module for string, plpgpsm, preload dictionaries Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
Re: Plans for 9.1, Grouping Sets, disabling multiqueries, contrib module for string, plpgpsm, preload dictionaries Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
2010/3/1 Peter Eisentraut : > On sön, 2010-02-21 at 11:00 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote: >> * Now I am working on migration of plpgpsm to plpgsql 9.0 base. I hope >> so I understand SQL/PSM well so I am able to write production quality >> implementation. If you like, I can integrate it to core. It can share >> about 40-50% code with plpgpsm. The behave of plpgpsm is same as >> plpgsql - without some plpgsql's historical issues (about FOUND, about >> NULL and record type). SQL/PSM is litlle bit richer language. Now we >> have not any wide used runtime so I don't thinking about rewriting. >> Maybe we can rewrite these PL language for parrot or lua runtime in >> future. But this step isn't necessary - people hasn't performance >> problems with PL based on PL runtime. > > While having a "cleaner" variant of PL/pgSQL available might be > desirable for some (but compare discussion on plpython3), given that you > label this SQL/PSM, I suppose you are also working on this from a > standards-compliance perspective. According to my reading, the part of > the SQL standard that is named SQL/PSM does not, however, describe a > procedural language in the PostgreSQL sense of the term. It describes > server-side modules and an extension to the SQL language (that is, it is > activated by CREATE FUNCTION ... LANGUAGE SQL). It remains to be > decided which parts of these are ultimately useful and desirable, but I > suggest that there be some discussion on the exact strategy in this area > first, lest we end up with a "plpgsql3". > I invite any discussion. I hope so my implementation will be clean and fast. Still I am learning this language and have to understand to core. I afraid so implementation SQL/PSM will be little bit modified - postgresql use little bit different concept of warnings, and mainly we have not "procedures". So there will be some new limits. My goal is creating some prototype now. I am sure so we can better integrate PL to main parser - but it hasn't be a first step. Pavel >
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления