Re: PostgreSQL future ideas
- From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
- To: "Gevik Babakhani" <pgdev(at)xs4all(dot)nl>
- Cc: "'Andrew Dunstan'" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "'Joshua Drake'" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "'Jonah H. Harris'" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>, "'Dave Page'" <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, "'PGSQL Hackers'" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, david(at)fetter(dot)org, josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com
- Subject: Re: PostgreSQL future ideas
- Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 20:02:59 -0400
- Message-id: <28772.1221868979@sss.pgh.pa.us> <text/plain>
I'm surprised no one pointed out that Postgres has *already* been ported
to a new language once. It was originally written in Lisp, and was
rewritten in C sometime in the Berkeley years. (Anyone know exactly
when or by whom? I don't.) You can still see the effects of that
origin in the system's liking for list-based data structures.
But the code base was an order of magnitude smaller and simpler back
then, meaning that a fresh port would be at least an order of magnitude
harder. Like other respondents, I'm not seeing where we'd get benefits
commensurate with the cost.
regards, tom lane
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index