Re: PL/pgSQL 2

On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 8:34 PM, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa <aht(at)nosys(dot)es> wrote:
> What I can add is that, if Postgres is to devote resources to a new
> language, I would plan it with a broader scope. What would attract most
> users? Would it bring non postgres users to Postgres? What could be one of
> the killer features of any next version? My trivial answer to most of these
> questions is: PL/SQL. I don't know with detail how complex this is to get in
> Postgres (well, EDB probably knows), but if I had to chose a new language,
> this is it. So my questions would rather be:

Interesting visionary ideas.

For me personally, I have no Oracle functions to port to Postgres, so
all differences
between PL/SQL and PL/pgSQL would just be unnecessary extra amount of work
in the process of porting existing code into a new language, be it
PL/SQL or PL/pgSQL 2.

That said, if PL/SQL wouldn't suffer from the problems I have with
PL/pgSQL today,
I wouldn't see a problem writing new code in the language, but then I
would probably
never manage to port all existing code to PL/SQL and I would be stuck
with a mix of code
in two languages instead of one. With PL/pgSQL 2 on the other hand, it
would be feasible
to eventually port all my existing code, as most of it would be
compatible without changes
and the rest would easy to make compatible.

I guess it's a question of if it's more important to recruit Oracle users,
or if it's more important to improve the life of existing PL/pgSQL
Postgres users.