2016-01-06 17:46 GMT+01:00 Jeff Anton <antonpg...@hesiod.org>: > On 01/06/16 08:04, Jim Nasby wrote: > ... > >> increase the number of active developers. My very talented colleague >>> doesn't write to Postgres due C language. He like to write planner in >>> lisp or erlang. Or like to play in these languages. C is barrier for >>> younger people. >>> >> >> ... > >> better job of "eating our own dog food". I think it would also be very >> interesting if there were add-on frameworks that allowed things like a >> planner written in another language (which with the planner hooks might >> actually be possible). >> > > Amazing how stuff comes back. > > A bit of history... The very first Postgres planner was written in Lisp. > Mostly this was to get the first usable system going quickly. The problems > with performance, garbage collection and memory use made a rewrite a high > priority. >
I am sorry for offtopic. I didn't propose to rewrite Postgres to Lisp. C is the most perfect language for long term production usage. But it isn't good language for scientific work, playing, testing hypothesis. > > IMO, most of this discussion is off track. Sadly, a significant > percentage of highly capable programmers are not very good at personal > interaction. At some point, poor people skills negate the value of > programming skills. I do think that needs recognition and a willingness to > say goodbye to persons who bring disrepute to the effort of keeping the > Postgresql world moving forward. The problem is codifying such rules and > that these same people who have the problem will likely argue such rules to > the death. Maybe the present discussion is an example. > Jeff Anton > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general >
