On 15/09/2014 2:12 PM, cowwoc wrote: > On 15/09/2014 2:02 PM, lup [via PostgreSQL] wrote: >> On 09/15/2014 11:49 AM, cowwoc wrote: >>> I think developers choosing this route (myself included) are willing >>> to pay the price in exchange for improved >>> readability/maintainability (the assumption being that the resulting >>> performance will be "good enough"). There seem to be plenty of >>> people heading in this direction otherwise other languages (like >>> pl/v8) wouldn't enjoy the popularity they do. >>> >>> Gili >> I've seen too many good java developers write too much terrible >> database-oriented code. If they are good with db and sql, plpgsql >> will not be a problem to learn. > > lup, > > Then does Postgresql support languages other than pl/pgsql? I'm not > trying to tear down pl/pgsql, simply pointing out that there is strong > demand for other languages as well. > > And to answer Pavel's earlier point: the lack of developers getting > behind pl/java and JDBC driver does not equate the lack of demand for > those tools. For every one person contributing patches, there are > 1000s who do not but are more than happy to use the finished work. > > Gili
"Then does" was meant to read "Then *why* does" :) Gili -- View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Why-isn-t-Java-support-part-of-Postgresql-core-tp5819025p5819105.html Sent from the PostgreSQL - general mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
