Re: [GENERAL] plPHP in core? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Stark
Subject Re: [GENERAL] plPHP in core?
Date
Msg-id 874qelq4fs.fsf@stark.xeocode.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [GENERAL] plPHP in core?  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@dcc.uchile.cl>)
List pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@dcc.uchile.cl> writes:

> Because those other languages are well designed and PHP is not.  The
> Postgres support package for Perl is a completely separate add-on, which
> you can add well after the core of Perl is installed.  Same for Python.
> But PHP is a braindead package which includes the Postgres support in
> the main codebase.

Oh egads. I finally understand this whole thread. You guys are all talking
about the old-fashioned Postgres support that has special pg* functions that
deal only with Postgres.

There are PHP modules that abstract that all away now, much like DBD::Pg, and
I believe they can be build as external modules. So I'm not sure how much this
matters any more. Perhaps it's still a factor for another release or two
though.

I'm surprised Tom's concerned about this. It's especially not relevant for
distribution based systems like Debian or Redhat. There are tons of circular
build dependencies in a complete distribution (think of the compiler toolchain
for example) and packagers can just download binary packages for the packages
they aren't developing at the time.

-- 
greg



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Greg Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: Notes on lock table spilling
Next
From: Christopher Kings-Lynne
Date:
Subject: PgFoundry.org busted?