Thread

1. Re: [HACKERS] Priorities for 6.6

   Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 1999-06-07T14:50:49Z

   "Mark Hollomon" <mhh@nortelnetworks.com> writes:
   > I've been looking for a project to get me active in the postgresql
   > community after lurking since before it was (officially) PostgreSQL. 
   >
   > I will do the PL/Perl interface.
   
   Great!  Glad to hear it.
   
   			regards, tom lane
   
   

2. Re: [HACKERS] Priorities for 6.6

   Vadim Mikheev <vadim@krs.ru> — 1999-06-07T15:18:44Z

   Tom Lane wrote:
   > 
   > "Mark Hollomon" <mhh@nortelnetworks.com> writes:
   > > I've been looking for a project to get me active in the postgresql
   > > community after lurking since before it was (officially) PostgreSQL.
   > >
   > > I will do the PL/Perl interface.
   > 
   > Great!  Glad to hear it.
   
   And me!
   
   Vadim
   
   

3. Re: [HACKERS] Priorities for 6.6

   Leslie Mikesell <les@mcs.net> — 1999-06-07T16:35:12Z

   According to Vadim Mikheev:
   
   > > "Mark Hollomon" <mhh@nortelnetworks.com> writes:
   > > > I've been looking for a project to get me active in the postgresql
   > > > community after lurking since before it was (officially) PostgreSQL.
   > > >
   > > > I will do the PL/Perl interface.
   > > 
   > > Great!  Glad to hear it.
   > 
   > And me!
   
   It would be really nice if the client/server interface could be
   fixed up to remove the tuple size limits by the time the embedded
   perl interface is added.   I think preloading some perl functions
   to get arbitrarily processed output back from a select would be
   handy for a lot of uses, and even better if we didn't have to worry
   about the size of the returned "record".
   
     Les Mikesell
      les@mcs.com