[Spacewalk-devel] Path to PostgreSQL Update

Devan Goodwin dgoodwin at redhat.com
Thu Jul 3 10:00:47 EDT 2008


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 04:29:02 -0400
Partha Aji <paji at redhat.com> wrote:

> 
> I was looking at the large number of functions/stored procedures that 
> would have to be ported from Oracle to Postgresql and then I noticed 
> this http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/interactive/plpython.html .
> 
> Considering the number of developers familiar with python I was 
> wondering if plpythoning all the stored procedures would be any more 
> useful plpgsling the full thing.
> Was wondering if anyone had experience with plpython vs plpgsql or 
> comments to share on the merits of one approach vs other. Note I am
> not saying plpython is the answer for everything, I am just thinking
> if it might be  useful for some of the 30+ lines stored procs we
> have.. For the smaller ones we can probably get away just using
> language =sql .. Infact  I'd want the really small ones to directly
> go to application code...
> 
> 
> Partha
> 

Well if the currently floated proposal goes ahead and we implement a
multi-language API behind which resides either versions of the stored
procedures or application code, this could probably be an option
available to whoever is doing the porting to postgresql if they prefer
it.

Could we get it packaged up and working with CentOS 5 / RHEL 5 and the
versions of postgresql contained within? (seems to be packaged for
Fedora already) Would everyone be ok with the added dependency?

Would PL/SQL -> plpython be an easier transition than PL/SQL ->
PL/pgSQL? 

Cheers,

Devan

- -- 
Devan Goodwin <dgoodwin at redhat.com>
Software Engineer      Red Hat Network
Halifax, Canada     650.567.9039x79267
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkhs25IACgkQAyHWaPV9my76VgCgyJgbCzmu3nagFvm+7tFBJH/7
5a0AnRTPVNV3XQS74cW/j+SP7OltHy62
=qnfB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




More information about the Spacewalk-devel mailing list