On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 14:34, TJ O'Donnell wrote:
> "Chad" <chadzakary@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "What we need now is an open source DB with clean APIs into various
> places in the software stack (eg we need a Berkeley DB kind of API
> under the hood into something like Postgres) A full bells and whistles
> relational DB with these low level ACCESS APIs will be a powerfull
> thing in the future. PostgreSQL take note. If you don't already have it
> you should begin exposing such a thing today in my humble opinion."
>
> I am quite happy with the c-language API for postgres, as far as it's
> capabilities and access to low-level postgres. OK, the docs and examples could
> be better. Am I missing something in Chad's comments/warnings or is he
> missing something in not understanding pg better?
> Chad, could you say more about what in the BDB/API is missing and needed in postgres?
>
> Could it be that Oracle's recent company purchases were intended simply to confuse
> people about the future of MySQL and therefore ecourage them to select Oracle?
Yeah, plus, besides PostgreSQL's front-end C api (libpqxx) there's the
backend api, which can be programmed with the C language directly, and
used to do things like write triggers and all that.
I'm not sure what more Chad could want there either. Hell, you could
spend a lifetime just exploring some small part of it.
