On 7/12/06, Thomas Hallgren <thomas@tada.se> wrote:
> it didn't seem anywhere close production readiness.
>
> Perhaps it's no surprise that I disagree when you say PL/J could be
> considered in the same light as PL/Java.
Having used both systems, I have to agree with Thomas; PL/Java is far
ahead of PL/J in terms of production readiness. Rather than argue the
differences between the architectures... I think it should be looked
at on a pro/con basis.
Many people have asked for procedural Java and generally pass over
PostgreSQL because they don't know about PL/Java or PL/J. In my
opinion, having a Java PL included in the core would be ideal.
PL/Java seems to be the only Java PL under consistent development and
maintenance, so I don't see it as something that would fall on the
shoulders of all other maintainers.
Just my 2 cents :)
--
Jonah H. Harris, Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1300
EnterpriseDB Corporation | fax: 732.331.1301
33 Wood Ave S, 2nd Floor | jharris@enterprisedb.com
Iselin, New Jersey 08830 | http://www.enterprisedb.com/
