On Jan 17, 2008 12:08 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> > Primary goal is ANSI SQL conformance (for me). Current PL/pgSQL isn't
> > compatible and it will not be compatible in future (we have different
> > implementation of SRF and really specific implementation of OUT
> > parameters). But why artificially create bigger dif between PL/pgSQL
> > and PL/SQL?
> >
> > I am sorry, I can't to speak in English gently (because my English is
> > all else than English), and some my notes are maybe too much hard.
>
> If primary goal is ANSI SQL conformance shouldn't we be focusing on
> pl/psm not plpgsql? (yes I am aware they are similar syntatically)
ANSI SQL conformance is not necessarily the only goal. Being able to
easily port Oracle applications is pretty nice. Being able to run
T-SQL in some fashion would be nice as well.
merlin
