From: "Joshua D. Drake" on 1 Feb 2010 15:12 On Mon, 2010-02-01 at 12:01 -0800, Nathan Boley wrote: > > On the basis of all of the foregoing, I don't think we can consider > > this patch further for this CommitFest and will update > > commitfest.postgresql.org accordingly. > > FWIW, I am very excited about this patch and would be happy to review > it but have been very busy over the past month. If I can promise a > review by Thursday morning could we keep it active? Hopefully, at the > very least, I can provide some useful feedback and spawn some > community interest. > > I am worried that there is a bit of a chicken and an egg problem with > this patch. I code nearly exclusively in python and C, but I have > often found pl/python to be very unwieldy. For this reason I often > use pl/perl or pl/pgsql for problems that, outside of postgres, I > would always use python. From the documentation, this patch seems like > an enormous step in the right direction. I am a +1 Joshua D. Drake > > -Nathan > -- PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 503.667.4564 Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering Respect is earned, not gained through arbitrary and repetitive use or Mr. or Sir. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Robert Haas on 1 Feb 2010 15:13 On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 3:01 PM, Nathan Boley <npboley(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> On the basis of all of the foregoing, I don't think we can consider >> this patch further for this CommitFest and will update >> commitfest.postgresql.org accordingly. > > FWIW, I am very excited about this patch and would be happy to review > it but have been very busy over the past month. If I can promise a > review by Thursday morning could we keep it active? Hopefully, at the > very least, I can provide some useful feedback and spawn some > community interest. > > I am worried that there is a bit of a chicken and an egg problem with > this patch. I code nearly exclusively in python and C, but I have > often found pl/python to be very unwieldy. For this reason I often > use pl/perl or pl/pgsql for problems that, outside of postgres, I > would always use python. From the documentation, this patch seems like > an enormous step in the right direction. I think it would be great for you to review it... I doubt that will cause it to get committed for 9.0, but my doubt is no reason for you to hold off reviewing it. ....Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Nathan Boley on 1 Feb 2010 15:23 > I think it would be great for you to review it... I doubt that will > cause it to get committed for 9.0, but my doubt is no reason for you > to hold off reviewing it. I assumed so, but the pretense of a chance will probably help to motivate me :-) I'll have something by Thursday, and then 'Returned with Feedback' will at least be factual. Best, Nathan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Peter Eisentraut on 1 Feb 2010 15:35 On mån, 2010-02-01 at 12:01 -0800, Nathan Boley wrote: > I code nearly exclusively in python and C, but I have > often found pl/python to be very unwieldy. For this reason I often > use pl/perl or pl/pgsql for problems that, outside of postgres, I > would always use python. I find that curious, because much of the criticism about the current PL/Python can be traced back to the fact that the implementation used to be an exact copy of PL/Perl. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: "Joshua D. Drake" on 1 Feb 2010 15:57
On Mon, 2010-02-01 at 22:35 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On mån, 2010-02-01 at 12:01 -0800, Nathan Boley wrote: > > I code nearly exclusively in python and C, but I have > > often found pl/python to be very unwieldy. For this reason I often > > use pl/perl or pl/pgsql for problems that, outside of postgres, I > > would always use python. > > I find that curious, because much of the criticism about the current > PL/Python can be traced back to the fact that the implementation used to > be an exact copy of PL/Perl. Well my guess is, if you want to code python, you don't want to feel like you are coding perl and thus you might as well just code perl? Joshua D. Drake > -- PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 503.667.4564 Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering Respect is earned, not gained through arbitrary and repetitive use or Mr. or Sir. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers |