mirror of
https://git.postgresql.org/git/postgresql.git
synced 2024-12-15 08:20:16 +08:00
1104 lines
48 KiB
Plaintext
1104 lines
48 KiB
Plaintext
From pgsql-hackers-owner+M4145@postgresql.org Sat Feb 3 05:54:06 2001
|
||
Received: from mail.postgresql.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
|
||
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id FAA22302
|
||
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Sat, 3 Feb 2001 05:54:04 -0500 (EST)
|
||
Received: from mail.postgresql.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
|
||
by mail.postgresql.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f13Ap4q95132;
|
||
Sat, 3 Feb 2001 05:51:04 -0500 (EST)
|
||
(envelope-from pgsql-hackers-owner+M4145@postgresql.org)
|
||
Received: from mail.retep.org.uk ([216.126.85.184])
|
||
by mail.postgresql.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f13AnIq94863
|
||
for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; Sat, 3 Feb 2001 05:49:18 -0500 (EST)
|
||
(envelope-from peter@retep.org.uk)
|
||
Received: from heather.retep.org.uk ([193.113.118.193])
|
||
(authenticated)
|
||
by mail.retep.org.uk (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f13AlnO94823;
|
||
Sat, 3 Feb 2001 05:47:49 -0500 (EST)
|
||
(envelope-from peter@retep.org.uk)
|
||
Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20010203103036.009efec0@mail.retep.org.uk>
|
||
X-Sender: peter@mail.retep.org.uk
|
||
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
|
||
Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 10:46:24 +0000
|
||
To: Alex Pilosov <alex@pilosoft.com>, tomasz konefal <twkonefal@yahoo.ca>
|
||
From: Peter Mount <peter@retep.org.uk>
|
||
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] TODO list: Allow Java server-side programming
|
||
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
|
||
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSO.4.10.10102021453160.9372-100000@spider.pilosoft.c
|
||
om>
|
||
References: <20010202194049.38902.qmail@web12003.mail.yahoo.com>
|
||
Mime-Version: 1.0
|
||
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
|
||
Precedence: bulk
|
||
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
|
||
Status: OR
|
||
|
||
At 14:57 02/02/01 -0500, Alex Pilosov wrote:
|
||
>On Fri, 2 Feb 2001, tomasz konefal wrote:
|
||
>
|
||
> > could someone please clarify what "Allow Java
|
||
> > server-side programming" actually means? what are the
|
||
> > limitations of using java and jdbc with pgsql?
|
||
>
|
||
>It means to embed Java interpreter inside postgres, and allow writing
|
||
>stored procedures and triggers in Java.
|
||
|
||
Thats correct. Basically you are talking of something like PL/Java. The
|
||
Java side would be simple, but its linking the JVM to the backend that's
|
||
the problem.
|
||
|
||
It's been a while since I delved into the backend, but unless it's changed
|
||
from fork() to threading, I don't really see this happening, unless someone
|
||
who knows C that well knows of a portable way of communicating between two
|
||
processes - other than RMI. If that could be solved, then you could use JNI
|
||
to interface the JVM.
|
||
|
||
I know some people think this would slow the backend down, but it's only
|
||
the instanciation of the JVM thats slow, hence the other reason fork() is
|
||
holding this back. Ideally you would want the JVM to be running with
|
||
PostMaster, and then each backend can then use the JVM as and when necessary.
|
||
|
||
Obviously you wouldn't want a JVM in every installation, but there are a
|
||
lot of good reasons to have this capability. For example, as part of the
|
||
course I did this week, we used Tomcat (Servlet/JSP/Web server). Now
|
||
there's no reason why Tomcat could run within the same JVM. JBoss is
|
||
another good example (EJB Server). The JBoss team have actually got Tomcat
|
||
to run within the same JVM. Doesn't hinder performance at all, but does
|
||
reduce the memory footprint.
|
||
|
||
This is a good future thing to look into (why not for 8.0 ;-) ). If we
|
||
could find an _optional_ way of hooking the backend direct into the JVM, we
|
||
could get PostgreSQL into a lot of new areas. It also would make things
|
||
like CORBA etc a doddle.
|
||
|
||
PS: I'm writing down notes of the course to go onto the JDBC web site this
|
||
weekend, so there's some nice things for EJB, RMI, Corba etc.
|
||
|
||
More later, Peter
|
||
|
||
|
||
From pgsql-hackers-owner+M4153@postgresql.org Sat Feb 3 11:54:12 2001
|
||
Received: from mail.postgresql.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
|
||
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id LAA13446
|
||
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Sat, 3 Feb 2001 11:54:12 -0500 (EST)
|
||
Received: from mail.postgresql.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
|
||
by mail.postgresql.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f13GrZq17345;
|
||
Sat, 3 Feb 2001 11:53:35 -0500 (EST)
|
||
(envelope-from pgsql-hackers-owner+M4153@postgresql.org)
|
||
Received: from mailout04.sul.t-online.com (mailout04.sul.t-online.com [194.25.134.18])
|
||
by mail.postgresql.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f13GnZq17000
|
||
for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; Sat, 3 Feb 2001 11:49:37 -0500 (EST)
|
||
(envelope-from peter_e@gmx.net)
|
||
Received: from fwd06.sul.t-online.com
|
||
by mailout04.sul.t-online.com with smtp
|
||
id 14P5rE-0000zq-00; Sat, 03 Feb 2001 17:48:16 +0100
|
||
Received: from peter.localdomain (520083510237-0001@[212.185.245.12]) by fmrl06.sul.t-online.com
|
||
with esmtp id 14P5r6-0YvD60C; Sat, 3 Feb 2001 17:48:08 +0100
|
||
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 17:56:33 +0100 (CET)
|
||
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
|
||
To: Peter Mount <peter@retep.org.uk>
|
||
cc: Alex Pilosov <alex@pilosoft.com>, tomasz konefal <twkonefal@yahoo.ca>,
|
||
<pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
|
||
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] TODO list: Allow Java server-side programming
|
||
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20010203103036.009efec0@mail.retep.org.uk>
|
||
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0102031746220.8648-100000@peter.localdomain>
|
||
MIME-Version: 1.0
|
||
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
|
||
X-Sender: 520083510237-0001@t-dialin.net
|
||
Precedence: bulk
|
||
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
|
||
Status: OR
|
||
|
||
Peter Mount writes:
|
||
|
||
> Thats correct. Basically you are talking of something like PL/Java. The
|
||
> Java side would be simple, but its linking the JVM to the backend that's
|
||
> the problem.
|
||
|
||
I've tried that recently, here's how it looks as far as Linux JVMs go:
|
||
|
||
* Kaffe has a very polluted name space. Calls to its own functions get
|
||
resolved to PostgreSQL, and vice versa. Crash and burn result. The Kaffe
|
||
folks have admitted that this should be fixed but I didn't look farther
|
||
yet.
|
||
|
||
* The Sun/Blackdown JVM didn't work at all (not even 'java -version')
|
||
until I upgraded my libc. Then a simple test run crashes with an "error
|
||
external to JVM"; at first it looked like a segfault when referencing a
|
||
string constant. In gdb I saw myself faced with about 10 threads running
|
||
when nothing was going on yet, at which point I was too exhausted to
|
||
proceed.
|
||
|
||
* IBM's offering didn't work at all. I don't recall the problem anymore
|
||
but I think it didn't even link correctly.
|
||
|
||
So currently I don't see how this could become a mainstream project, let
|
||
alone across platforms.
|
||
|
||
> I know some people think this would slow the backend down, but it's only
|
||
> the instanciation of the JVM thats slow, hence the other reason fork() is
|
||
> holding this back. Ideally you would want the JVM to be running with
|
||
> PostMaster, and then each backend can then use the JVM as and when necessary.
|
||
|
||
But how do the other languages cope? Starting up a new Perl for each
|
||
backend can't be so cheap either.
|
||
|
||
--
|
||
Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net http://yi.org/peter-e/
|
||
|
||
|
||
From pgsql-hackers-owner+M4154@postgresql.org Sat Feb 3 12:37:02 2001
|
||
Received: from mail.postgresql.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
|
||
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id MAA00813
|
||
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Sat, 3 Feb 2001 12:37:01 -0500 (EST)
|
||
Received: from mail.postgresql.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
|
||
by mail.postgresql.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f13Haiq21225;
|
||
Sat, 3 Feb 2001 12:36:44 -0500 (EST)
|
||
(envelope-from pgsql-hackers-owner+M4154@postgresql.org)
|
||
Received: from spider.pilosoft.com (p55-222.acedsl.com [160.79.55.222])
|
||
by mail.postgresql.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f13HX9q20913
|
||
for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; Sat, 3 Feb 2001 12:33:09 -0500 (EST)
|
||
(envelope-from alex@pilosoft.com)
|
||
Received: from localhost (alexmail@localhost)
|
||
by spider.pilosoft.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA09231;
|
||
Sat, 3 Feb 2001 12:36:01 -0500 (EST)
|
||
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 12:36:01 -0500 (EST)
|
||
From: Alex Pilosov <alex@pilosoft.com>
|
||
To: Peter Mount <peter@retep.org.uk>
|
||
cc: Alex Pilosov <alex@pilosoft.com>, tomasz konefal <twkonefal@yahoo.ca>,
|
||
pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
|
||
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] TODO list: Allow Java server-side programming
|
||
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20010203103036.009efec0@mail.retep.org.uk>
|
||
Message-ID: <Pine.BSO.4.10.10102031220470.10437-100000@spider.pilosoft.com>
|
||
MIME-Version: 1.0
|
||
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
|
||
Precedence: bulk
|
||
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
|
||
Status: OR
|
||
|
||
On Sat, 3 Feb 2001, Peter Mount wrote:
|
||
|
||
> It's been a while since I delved into the backend, but unless it's
|
||
> changed from fork() to threading, I don't really see this happening,
|
||
> unless someone who knows C that well knows of a portable way of
|
||
> communicating between two processes - other than RMI. If that could be
|
||
> solved, then you could use JNI to interface the JVM.
|
||
There are many ways one can do this:
|
||
a) each backend will have a JVM linked in (shared object). This is the
|
||
way perl/tcl/ruby is embedded, and it works pretty nice. But, Java
|
||
['s memory requirement] sucks, therefore, this may not be the optimal
|
||
way.
|
||
|
||
> I know some people think this would slow the backend down, but it's
|
||
> only the instanciation of the JVM thats slow, hence the other reason
|
||
> fork() is holding this back. Ideally you would want the JVM to be
|
||
> running with PostMaster, and then each backend can then use the JVM as
|
||
> and when necessary.
|
||
b) since JVM is threaded, it may be more efficient to have a dedicated
|
||
process running JVM, and accepting some sort of IPC connections from
|
||
postgres processes. The biggest problem here is SPI, there aren't a good
|
||
way for that JVM to talk back to database.
|
||
|
||
c) temporarily, to have quick working code, you can reach java using hacks
|
||
using programming languages already built into postgres. Both TCL (tcl
|
||
blend) and Perl (JPL and another hack which name escapes me) are able to
|
||
execute java code. SPI is possible, I think both of these bindings are
|
||
two-way (you can go perl-java-perl-java). Might be worth a quick try?
|
||
-alex
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
From pgsql-hackers-owner+M4164@postgresql.org Sun Feb 4 04:23:42 2001
|
||
Received: from mail.postgresql.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
|
||
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id EAA04260
|
||
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Sun, 4 Feb 2001 04:23:41 -0500 (EST)
|
||
Received: from mail.postgresql.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
|
||
by mail.postgresql.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f149Nhx75443;
|
||
Sun, 4 Feb 2001 04:23:43 -0500 (EST)
|
||
(envelope-from pgsql-hackers-owner+M4164@postgresql.org)
|
||
Received: from me.tm.ee (adsl895.estpak.ee [213.168.23.133])
|
||
by mail.postgresql.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f149Mgx75338
|
||
for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; Sun, 4 Feb 2001 04:22:42 -0500 (EST)
|
||
(envelope-from hannu@tm.ee)
|
||
Received: from tm.ee (IDENT:hannu@localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
|
||
by me.tm.ee (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA01488;
|
||
Sun, 4 Feb 2001 11:18:09 +0200
|
||
Message-ID: <3A7D1E51.E383AB7F@tm.ee>
|
||
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2001 11:18:09 +0200
|
||
From: Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee>
|
||
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.17 i686)
|
||
X-Accept-Language: en
|
||
MIME-Version: 1.0
|
||
To: Peter Mount <peter@retep.org.uk>
|
||
CC: Alex Pilosov <alex@pilosoft.com>, tomasz konefal <twkonefal@yahoo.ca>,
|
||
pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
|
||
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] TODO list: Allow Java server-side programming
|
||
References: <20010202194049.38902.qmail@web12003.mail.yahoo.com> <5.0.2.1.0.20010203103036.009efec0@mail.retep.org.uk>
|
||
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
|
||
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
|
||
Precedence: bulk
|
||
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
|
||
Status: OR
|
||
|
||
Peter Mount wrote:
|
||
>
|
||
> At 14:57 02/02/01 -0500, Alex Pilosov wrote:
|
||
> >On Fri, 2 Feb 2001, tomasz konefal wrote:
|
||
> >
|
||
> > > could someone please clarify what "Allow Java
|
||
> > > server-side programming" actually means? what are the
|
||
> > > limitations of using java and jdbc with pgsql?
|
||
> >
|
||
> >It means to embed Java interpreter inside postgres, and allow writing
|
||
> >stored procedures and triggers in Java.
|
||
>
|
||
> Thats correct. Basically you are talking of something like PL/Java. The
|
||
> Java side would be simple, but its linking the JVM to the backend that's
|
||
> the problem.
|
||
>
|
||
> It's been a while since I delved into the backend, but unless it's changed
|
||
> from fork() to threading,
|
||
|
||
Someone posted here recently his port/tweaks of backend so that it used
|
||
threads instead of fork(). IIRC it was done to be used inside a java
|
||
client in an embedded system.
|
||
|
||
----------------
|
||
Hannu
|
||
|
||
From pgsql-hackers-owner+M4168@postgresql.org Sun Feb 4 06:54:27 2001
|
||
Received: from mail.postgresql.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
|
||
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id GAA19741
|
||
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Sun, 4 Feb 2001 06:54:26 -0500 (EST)
|
||
Received: from mail.postgresql.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
|
||
by mail.postgresql.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f14BsOx83329;
|
||
Sun, 4 Feb 2001 06:54:24 -0500 (EST)
|
||
(envelope-from pgsql-hackers-owner+M4168@postgresql.org)
|
||
Received: from mail.retep.org.uk ([216.126.85.184])
|
||
by mail.postgresql.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f14Bs9x83240
|
||
for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; Sun, 4 Feb 2001 06:54:09 -0500 (EST)
|
||
(envelope-from peter@retep.org.uk)
|
||
Received: from heather.retep.org.uk ([193.113.241.180])
|
||
(authenticated)
|
||
by mail.retep.org.uk (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f14BqkR83161;
|
||
Sun, 4 Feb 2001 06:52:46 -0500 (EST)
|
||
(envelope-from peter@retep.org.uk)
|
||
Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20010204114942.00a0c8d0@mail.retep.org.uk>
|
||
X-Sender: peter@mail.retep.org.uk
|
||
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
|
||
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2001 11:51:21 +0000
|
||
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
|
||
From: Peter Mount <peter@retep.org.uk>
|
||
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] TODO list: Allow Java server-side programming
|
||
Cc: Alex Pilosov <alex@pilosoft.com>, tomasz konefal <twkonefal@yahoo.ca>,
|
||
<pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
|
||
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0102031746220.8648-100000@peter.localdomain>
|
||
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010203103036.009efec0@mail.retep.org.uk>
|
||
Mime-Version: 1.0
|
||
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
|
||
Precedence: bulk
|
||
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
|
||
Status: OR
|
||
|
||
At 17:56 03/02/01 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
|
||
>Peter Mount writes:
|
||
>
|
||
> > Thats correct. Basically you are talking of something like PL/Java. The
|
||
> > Java side would be simple, but its linking the JVM to the backend that's
|
||
> > the problem.
|
||
>
|
||
>I've tried that recently, here's how it looks as far as Linux JVMs go:
|
||
|
||
[snip]
|
||
|
||
|
||
>So currently I don't see how this could become a mainstream project, let
|
||
>alone across platforms.
|
||
|
||
I don't think it would be, but it would be a good side-project. Over time
|
||
the various JVM's should become better to interface with.
|
||
|
||
|
||
> > I know some people think this would slow the backend down, but it's only
|
||
> > the instanciation of the JVM thats slow, hence the other reason fork() is
|
||
> > holding this back. Ideally you would want the JVM to be running with
|
||
> > PostMaster, and then each backend can then use the JVM as and when
|
||
> necessary.
|
||
>
|
||
>But how do the other languages cope? Starting up a new Perl for each
|
||
>backend can't be so cheap either.
|
||
|
||
But a lot cheaper than Java.
|
||
|
||
Peter
|
||
|
||
|
||
From pgsql-hackers-owner+M4169@postgresql.org Sun Feb 4 06:57:24 2001
|
||
Received: from mail.postgresql.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
|
||
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id GAA19817
|
||
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Sun, 4 Feb 2001 06:57:23 -0500 (EST)
|
||
Received: from mail.postgresql.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
|
||
by mail.postgresql.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f14BvLx83711;
|
||
Sun, 4 Feb 2001 06:57:21 -0500 (EST)
|
||
(envelope-from pgsql-hackers-owner+M4169@postgresql.org)
|
||
Received: from mail.retep.org.uk ([216.126.85.184])
|
||
by mail.postgresql.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f14Bv7x83611
|
||
for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; Sun, 4 Feb 2001 06:57:07 -0500 (EST)
|
||
(envelope-from peter@retep.org.uk)
|
||
Received: from heather.retep.org.uk ([193.113.241.180])
|
||
(authenticated)
|
||
by mail.retep.org.uk (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f14BtjR83557;
|
||
Sun, 4 Feb 2001 06:55:45 -0500 (EST)
|
||
(envelope-from peter@retep.org.uk)
|
||
Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20010204115139.009f1c50@mail.retep.org.uk>
|
||
X-Sender: peter@mail.retep.org.uk
|
||
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
|
||
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2001 11:54:20 +0000
|
||
To: Alex Pilosov <alex@pilosoft.com>
|
||
From: Peter Mount <peter@retep.org.uk>
|
||
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] TODO list: Allow Java server-side programming
|
||
Cc: Alex Pilosov <alex@pilosoft.com>, tomasz konefal <twkonefal@yahoo.ca>,
|
||
pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
|
||
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSO.4.10.10102031220470.10437-100000@spider.pilosoft.
|
||
com>
|
||
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010203103036.009efec0@mail.retep.org.uk>
|
||
Mime-Version: 1.0
|
||
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
|
||
Precedence: bulk
|
||
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
|
||
Status: OR
|
||
|
||
At 12:36 03/02/01 -0500, Alex Pilosov wrote:
|
||
>On Sat, 3 Feb 2001, Peter Mount wrote:
|
||
|
||
[snip]
|
||
|
||
|
||
> > I know some people think this would slow the backend down, but it's
|
||
> > only the instanciation of the JVM thats slow, hence the other reason
|
||
> > fork() is holding this back. Ideally you would want the JVM to be
|
||
> > running with PostMaster, and then each backend can then use the JVM as
|
||
> > and when necessary.
|
||
>b) since JVM is threaded, it may be more efficient to have a dedicated
|
||
>process running JVM, and accepting some sort of IPC connections from
|
||
>postgres processes. The biggest problem here is SPI, there aren't a good
|
||
>way for that JVM to talk back to database.
|
||
|
||
That was my other idea, but it is the IPC thats problematical. You would
|
||
still need to do some native api to implement some messaging system between
|
||
the two.
|
||
|
||
However, at the other extreme there is RPC, which is possible now, but
|
||
would be a lot slower.
|
||
|
||
|
||
>c) temporarily, to have quick working code, you can reach java using hacks
|
||
>using programming languages already built into postgres. Both TCL (tcl
|
||
>blend) and Perl (JPL and another hack which name escapes me) are able to
|
||
>execute java code. SPI is possible, I think both of these bindings are
|
||
>two-way (you can go perl-java-perl-java). Might be worth a quick try?
|
||
|
||
Might be one way to go...
|
||
|
||
Peter
|
||
|
||
>-alex
|
||
>
|
||
|
||
|
||
From pgsql-jdbc-owner+M884@postgresql.org Wed Jun 27 13:36:09 2001
|
||
Return-path: <pgsql-jdbc-owner+M884@postgresql.org>
|
||
Received: from postgresql.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
|
||
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f5RHa9q05483
|
||
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 13:36:09 -0400 (EDT)
|
||
Received: from postgresql.org.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
|
||
by postgresql.org (8.11.3/8.11.1) with SMTP id f5RHaAa03078
|
||
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 13:36:10 -0400 (EDT)
|
||
(envelope-from pgsql-jdbc-owner+M884@postgresql.org)
|
||
Received: from net2.micro-automation.com (net2.micro-automation.com [64.7.141.29])
|
||
by postgresql.org (8.11.3/8.11.1) with SMTP id f5RHOka96908
|
||
for <pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org>; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 13:24:46 -0400 (EDT)
|
||
(envelope-from Dave@micro-automation.net)
|
||
Received: (qmail 32671 invoked from network); 27 Jun 2001 17:24:39 -0000
|
||
Received: from eboxwest.ebox.com (HELO INSPIRON) (206.51.23.194)
|
||
by net2.micro-automation.com with SMTP; 27 Jun 2001 17:24:39 -0000
|
||
Reply-To: <Dave@micro-automation.net>
|
||
From: "Dave Cramer" <Dave@micro-automation.net>
|
||
To: "'Barry Lind'" <barry@xythos.com>
|
||
cc: <pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org>
|
||
Subject: [JDBC] RE: Todo/missing? (was Re: [ADMIN] High memory usage [PATCH])
|
||
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 13:22:42 -0400
|
||
Organization: Micro Automation Inc.
|
||
Message-ID: <008301c0ff2d$c885d880$0201a8c0@INSPIRON>
|
||
MIME-Version: 1.0
|
||
Content-Type: text/plain;
|
||
charset="us-ascii"
|
||
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
|
||
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
|
||
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
|
||
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2616
|
||
Importance: Normal
|
||
In-Reply-To: <3B39352E.6060904@xythos.com>
|
||
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
|
||
X-AntiVirus: scanned for viruses by AMaViS 0.2.1 (http://amavis.org/)
|
||
Precedence: bulk
|
||
Sender: pgsql-jdbc-owner@postgresql.org
|
||
Status: OR
|
||
|
||
Barry,
|
||
|
||
The getXXXFunctions aren't implemented
|
||
Some of the other functions are correct for version 7.1 but not for
|
||
previous versions. Ie. The row length, etc. I think the driver should
|
||
get the version and determine what is correct for each version.
|
||
|
||
I think this is incorrect.
|
||
public boolean supportsSelectForUpdate() throws SQLException
|
||
{
|
||
// XXX-Not Implemented
|
||
return false;
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
There are a number of things here which are hard coded, and possible
|
||
wrong.
|
||
|
||
I started to work on this, but since I am going on vacation next week I
|
||
have a number of fires to get down to a slow burn before I go.
|
||
|
||
Dave
|
||
|
||
-----Original Message-----
|
||
From: Barry Lind [mailto:barry@xythos.com]
|
||
Sent: June 26, 2001 9:22 PM
|
||
To: Dave Cramer
|
||
Cc: pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org
|
||
Subject: Re: Todo/missing? (was Re: [ADMIN] High memory usage [PATCH])
|
||
|
||
Dave,
|
||
|
||
Can you give a little more detail on what you mean by 'Improved
|
||
DatabaseMetaData'? What specific areas are currently lacking?
|
||
|
||
thanks,
|
||
--Barry
|
||
|
||
|
||
>>On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 10:56:18PM -0400, Dave Cramer wrote:
|
||
>>
|
||
>>>I have to agree, we need to compile a todo list.
|
||
>>>
|
||
>>>Mine would include:
|
||
>>>
|
||
>>>1) Comprehensive test suite. This may be available already.
|
||
>>>2) Updateable resultSet
|
||
>>>3) Improved DatabaseMetaData
|
||
>>>4) Compatible blob support
|
||
>>>
|
||
>
|
||
> Added to official PostgreSQL TODO:
|
||
>
|
||
> * JDBC
|
||
> * Comprehensive test suite. This may be available already.
|
||
> * Updateable resultSet
|
||
> * Improved DatabaseMetaData
|
||
> * Compatible blob support
|
||
>
|
||
>
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
|
||
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
|
||
|
||
From pgsql-jdbc-owner+M968@postgresql.org Sun Jul 8 18:59:29 2001
|
||
Return-path: <pgsql-jdbc-owner+M968@postgresql.org>
|
||
Received: from postgresql.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
|
||
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f68MxTl05403
|
||
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 18:59:29 -0400 (EDT)
|
||
Received: from postgresql.org.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
|
||
by postgresql.org (8.11.3/8.11.1) with SMTP id f68MxWa07043
|
||
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 18:59:32 -0400 (EDT)
|
||
(envelope-from pgsql-jdbc-owner+M968@postgresql.org)
|
||
Received: from mailout02.sul.t-online.de (mailout02.sul.t-online.com [194.25.134.17])
|
||
by postgresql.org (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f68MrGa05368
|
||
for <pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org>; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 18:53:16 -0400 (EDT)
|
||
(envelope-from peter_e@gmx.net)
|
||
Received: from fwd06.sul.t-online.de
|
||
by mailout02.sul.t-online.de with smtp
|
||
id 15JNQP-0004x9-00; Mon, 09 Jul 2001 00:53:13 +0200
|
||
Received: from peter.localdomain (520083510237-0001@[212.185.245.47]) by fmrl06.sul.t-online.com
|
||
with esmtp id 15JNQH-0xfc00C; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 00:53:05 +0200
|
||
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 00:55:37 +0200 (CEST)
|
||
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
|
||
To: <pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org>
|
||
Subject: [JDBC] To do list for DatabaseMetaData
|
||
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0107090041240.677-100000@peter.localdomain>
|
||
MIME-Version: 1.0
|
||
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
|
||
X-Sender: 520083510237-0001@t-dialin.net
|
||
Precedence: bulk
|
||
Sender: pgsql-jdbc-owner@postgresql.org
|
||
Status: OR
|
||
|
||
Since DatabaseMetaData seems to have been a subject of interest lately I
|
||
have composed a list of concrete things that need to be done there.
|
||
|
||
The spec of DatabaseMetaData is here:
|
||
http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.3/docs/api/java/sql/DatabaseMetaData.html
|
||
|
||
All the functions listed in the spec and not listed below I have recently
|
||
checked and updated for correctness and compliance. Thus, this list is
|
||
complete. Functions marked with '?' I have not checked yet.
|
||
|
||
If someone wants to tackle some of the getThings() functions, a
|
||
description of the system catalogs is in the Developer's Guide. Also note
|
||
that some functions currently incorrectly handle the case of null patterns
|
||
vs. "" patterns vs. "%" patterns.
|
||
|
||
At least two parameters obtained by a DatabaseMetaData method are
|
||
user-tunable on the server side. The only way to get at those numbers
|
||
currently is to use SHOW and parse the NOTICE: it sends back (which is
|
||
impossible in the days of internationalized messages), so a nice
|
||
side-project would be to implement a get_config_variable(text) returns
|
||
text (better names possible) function to allow easier access.
|
||
|
||
Now the list:
|
||
|
||
allProceduresAreCallable() not all procedures listed are
|
||
callable (triggers, in/out)
|
||
allTablesAreSelectable() should this check access
|
||
privileges or what?
|
||
getSQLKeywords() outdated, could be automated like
|
||
keywords.sgml
|
||
getNumericFunctions() decide what exactly is a "numeric function"?
|
||
getStringFunctions() ditto
|
||
getSystemFunctions() ditto
|
||
getTimeDateFunctions() ditto
|
||
getExtraNameCharacters() server allows \200 to \377, how
|
||
does this fit in with Unicode?
|
||
getMaxColumnNameLength() 32 is hard-coded here, maybe query server
|
||
getMaxColumnsInIndex() this should be detected from server
|
||
getMaxColumnsInTable() this limit is probably shaky
|
||
getMaxConnections() could query the server for this
|
||
(SHOW, see above)
|
||
getMaxCursorNameLength() 32 hard-coded
|
||
getMaxSchemaNameLength() will be 32 when done
|
||
getMaxProcedureNameLength() 32 hard-coded
|
||
getMaxCatalogNameLength() should be NAMEDATALEN
|
||
doesMaxRowSizeIncludeBlobs() since we don't have blobs, should
|
||
this throw an exception?
|
||
getMaxStatements() questionable, see comment there
|
||
getMaxTableNameLength() 32 hard-coded
|
||
getMaxUserNameLength() 32 hard-coded
|
||
getDefaultTransactionIsolation() This is configurable in 7.2.
|
||
(SHOW, see above)
|
||
getProcedures() missing catalog (database) and
|
||
remarks columns
|
||
getProcedureColumns() only dummy implementation
|
||
getTables() fails to handle pre-7.1 servers
|
||
(relkind 'v')
|
||
getSchemas() This should throw an exception.
|
||
getTableTypes() ?
|
||
getColumns() ?
|
||
getColumnPrivileges() not implemented
|
||
getTablePrivileges() not implemented
|
||
getBestRowIdentifier() only dummy implementation
|
||
getVersionColumns() not implemented
|
||
getPrimaryKeys() ?
|
||
getImportedKeys() ?
|
||
getExportedKeys() not implemented
|
||
getCrossReference() not implemented
|
||
getTypeInfo() ?
|
||
getIndexInfo() ?
|
||
getUDTs() ?
|
||
|
||
|
||
--
|
||
Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net http://funkturm.homeip.net/~peter
|
||
|
||
|
||
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
|
||
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
|
||
|
||
http://www.postgresql.org/search.mpl
|
||
|
||
From pgsql-general-owner+M14602@postgresql.org Sat Sep 1 00:50:49 2001
|
||
Return-path: <pgsql-general-owner+M14602@postgresql.org>
|
||
Received: from server1.pgsql.org (server1.pgsql.org [64.39.15.238] (may be forged))
|
||
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f814onF24433
|
||
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 00:50:49 -0400 (EDT)
|
||
Received: from postgresql.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
|
||
by server1.pgsql.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id f814pNq39726;
|
||
Fri, 31 Aug 2001 23:51:23 -0500 (CDT)
|
||
(envelope-from pgsql-general-owner+M14602@postgresql.org)
|
||
Received: from ns1.austin.rr.com (ns1.austin.rr.com [24.93.35.62])
|
||
by postgresql.org (8.11.3/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f81439f96700
|
||
for <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 00:03:09 -0400 (EDT)
|
||
(envelope-from rsanford@nolimitsystems.com)
|
||
Received: from mightywombat (cs662523-179.houston.rr.com [66.25.23.179])
|
||
by ns1.austin.rr.com (8.12.0.Beta16/8.12.0.Beta16) with SMTP id f813x7pX027417
|
||
for <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:59:07 -0500
|
||
From: "Robert J. Sanford, Jr." <rsanford@nolimitsystems.com>
|
||
To: <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
|
||
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] PL/java?
|
||
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 23:02:04 -0500
|
||
Message-ID: <HOEFIONAHHKFEFENBMNOAEPPCBAA.rsanford@nolimitsystems.com>
|
||
MIME-Version: 1.0
|
||
Content-Type: text/plain;
|
||
charset="US-ASCII"
|
||
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
|
||
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
|
||
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
|
||
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
|
||
Importance: Normal
|
||
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
|
||
In-Reply-To: <MAEFKNDLAHNIFMAIEGHJCEKJCDAA.knight@phunc.com>
|
||
Precedence: bulk
|
||
Sender: pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org
|
||
Status: OR
|
||
|
||
note - i don't work for any of the companies whose products
|
||
are mentioned below. i have performed evaluations of these
|
||
products and the support provided when attempting to determine
|
||
what platform my company's systems should run on. unfortunately,
|
||
i did not choose orion and i am suffering for it now...
|
||
|
||
some goober blathered thusly:
|
||
> Have you ever actually used Java on an enterprise-level
|
||
> application? Ever see the Tomcat webserver? It uses
|
||
> 100MB of memory, drives the load on our server up to 8,
|
||
> and doesn't serve nearly as fast apache. Do you really
|
||
> want that in your database?
|
||
|
||
first - don't complain about java because you or someone
|
||
in your group/department/company made a poor decision on
|
||
what tools to use. that's like complaining about mexican
|
||
food when the only experience you have is eating an out-
|
||
dated frozen burrito from the 7-11 freezer.
|
||
|
||
when looking at the performance of java you have to take
|
||
a look at two things - first you have to compare various
|
||
java implementations against each other and then you have
|
||
to compare the best java implementations against native
|
||
c/c++ code. the following link does that. the java tests
|
||
include tomcat, orion, websphere, and resin. jrun and
|
||
weblogic were originally included in the testing but
|
||
were both removed at their companies' request.
|
||
|
||
the tests also compare orion vs microsoft asp running on
|
||
win2k and iis5. all tests run on the same hardware.
|
||
|
||
what i believe these tests clearly demonstrate is that
|
||
java is not the problem, the implementation applications
|
||
based on java is. i also do not believe that tomcat is
|
||
a fair representation of java performance in that it is
|
||
intended to be a reference implementation. as such, the
|
||
code base should sacrifice performance for clarity.
|
||
|
||
http://www.orionserver.com/benchmarks/benchmark.html
|
||
|
||
|
||
while not in the benchmark i would also like to
|
||
recommend jetty as an app server. it is an opensource,
|
||
100% java web and application server. in its base form
|
||
it is "just" a web, servlet, and jsp engine. it does,
|
||
however, have contributed code providing integration
|
||
with other j2ee opensource projects such as the JBoss
|
||
EJB engine.
|
||
|
||
you can find the jetty home page at:
|
||
http://jetty.mortbay.com/
|
||
|
||
and then they blathered some more:
|
||
> Compare the speed of Oracle 8 with 8i if you don't
|
||
> believe me. The stability is also much worse. Ever
|
||
> see a JVM on any platform that didn't crash if you
|
||
> looked at it cockeyed? Ever really trust the garbage
|
||
> collection? I don't. I've found a memory leak in IBM
|
||
> developed java libraries. Gotta restart that app
|
||
> every once in a while to reclaim system resources it
|
||
> gobbled up and never gave back.
|
||
|
||
some mention was made regarding the performance of
|
||
the oracle8i application server. well, oracle has
|
||
realized that their performance was sub-optimal and
|
||
rectified the situation by licensing the orion server
|
||
for oracle9i. while money and politics most certainly
|
||
play a part in any licensing arrangement they must
|
||
also realize that making customers happy through the
|
||
performance of their applications will lead to more
|
||
money. the link to the press release is below.
|
||
|
||
http://www.oracle.com/corporate/press/index.html?759347.html
|
||
|
||
all of that being said...
|
||
|
||
i don't think that the person that started this thread
|
||
did anything wrong by making the request they did. that
|
||
is what opensource is all about - contributions, even
|
||
just contributions of ideas, are welcomed. even so, there
|
||
are several options that i see for getting it implemented:
|
||
1) its an open source project so implement it yourself.
|
||
while i have never worked on modifying the code base
|
||
i am extremely confident that the current developers
|
||
will be more than willing to give you advice and
|
||
pointers.
|
||
2) if #1 is not feasible either because you don't have
|
||
the time, the inclination, or the experience then
|
||
you can write a contract that will pay one of the
|
||
postgres developers to implement it for you.
|
||
3) if that isn't feasible you can try to get a volunteer
|
||
to do so.
|
||
4) if that isn't feasible then you either have to live
|
||
with what you have, go elsewhere, or be quiet.
|
||
|
||
to the person that blathered thusly in response to the
|
||
request for java:
|
||
> Merits of the language notwithstanding, I'd rather
|
||
> not have a buggy, still under development
|
||
> (depreciating everything under the sun with every
|
||
> new iteration) JVM parasite in my DB.
|
||
|
||
informed and intelligent debate is good. given that i
|
||
believe such to be true, i would request that you
|
||
refrain from blathering such vitriol and uninformed
|
||
nonsense. not only is it for the good of the people
|
||
on the list who don't want to hear it but it will
|
||
also do you good by not telling everyone out there
|
||
that you are a very silly person that doesn't deal
|
||
with logic and/or facts.
|
||
|
||
to everyone else on the list - if we all contribute
|
||
a penny we could probably buy enough burritos from
|
||
7-11 to make sure that his hands and mouth are busy
|
||
for a good long while.
|
||
|
||
rjsjr
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
|
||
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
|
||
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
|
||
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
|
||
|
||
From pgsql-general-owner+M14597@postgresql.org Fri Aug 31 23:23:15 2001
|
||
Return-path: <pgsql-general-owner+M14597@postgresql.org>
|
||
Received: from server1.pgsql.org (server1.pgsql.org [64.39.15.238] (may be forged))
|
||
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f813NEF20222
|
||
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 23:23:14 -0400 (EDT)
|
||
Received: from postgresql.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
|
||
by server1.pgsql.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id f813Njq38048;
|
||
Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:23:46 -0500 (CDT)
|
||
(envelope-from pgsql-general-owner+M14597@postgresql.org)
|
||
Received: from spider.pilosoft.com (p55-222.acedsl.com [160.79.55.222])
|
||
by postgresql.org (8.11.3/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f812Yuf42942
|
||
for <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:35:04 -0400 (EDT)
|
||
(envelope-from alex@pilosoft.com)
|
||
Received: from localhost (alexmail@localhost)
|
||
by spider.pilosoft.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA20075;
|
||
Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:35:23 -0400 (EDT)
|
||
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:35:23 -0400 (EDT)
|
||
From: Alex Pilosov <alex@pilosoft.com>
|
||
To: Alex Knight <knight@phunc.com>
|
||
cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
|
||
Subject: [WAY OT] Re: [GENERAL] PL/java?
|
||
In-Reply-To: <MAEFKNDLAHNIFMAIEGHJCEKJCDAA.knight@phunc.com>
|
||
Message-ID: <Pine.BSO.4.10.10108312220140.19501-100000@spider.pilosoft.com>
|
||
MIME-Version: 1.0
|
||
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
|
||
Precedence: bulk
|
||
Sender: pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org
|
||
Status: OR
|
||
|
||
On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, Alex Knight wrote:
|
||
|
||
> It is generally wiser to split the webservers from the appservers;
|
||
> that will save on memory footprints from each respectively. That alone
|
||
> can give each machine a specific task to accomplish... generally more
|
||
> efficiently. But I would assume you know this.
|
||
|
||
And it is wise to split database from middleware, and not try to saddle
|
||
PostgreSQL with requirements to support Java in-process. _IF_ java stored
|
||
procedures are implemented, it should be via something like a) oracle's
|
||
extproc (start a separate process to load the function) b) some of perl
|
||
java tools (they start a jdk in a separate process and communicate with it
|
||
using RMI).
|
||
|
||
|
||
Problem with java-pgsql integration is the threads model: Java really
|
||
really wants threads. Postgres doesn't do threads. So if most simple way
|
||
is attempted, you will incur overhead of starting up JVM for each backend
|
||
(a few seconds as opposed to milliseconds) and non-shared 30M of memory
|
||
per backend (as opposed to currently <3 megs of non-shared memory per
|
||
backend).
|
||
|
||
> Using something like WebLogic, WebSphere, or Orion would be a wiser
|
||
> approach. For the company with the low budget, Orion is only something
|
||
> like $2000, and it has full J2EE support, including EJBs, etc. Try
|
||
> finding that kind of richness in Tomcat. Also, Orion takes up only
|
||
> 40-50mb at start, which is really fairly reasonable; ram is cheap
|
||
> anyways... a server that has to perform complicated algorithms to a
|
||
> large audience but has hardly any ram shouldn't be on the internet
|
||
> anyways; unless it can handle it.
|
||
|
||
_ONLY_ 40-50Mb?! Egads, I'm hard pressed to find any other piece of
|
||
(non-windows, non-java) software that takes 40-50M just to start up!
|
||
|
||
I worked with both CrapLogic and CrapSphere. Weblogic takes 20-60 seconds
|
||
to start up on P3-800, that, IMHO, is ridiculous.
|
||
|
||
It is not only issue of memory, its easy to throw memory at the problem,
|
||
its an issue of _incremental use_ of memory. As you scale
|
||
|
||
> I feel that you don't really have enough experience with _java_ to
|
||
> judge it accurately. Frankly, the JVM is quite small nowadays,
|
||
> considering the amount of base classes that sit in memory much of the
|
||
> time. And the JVMs are really much faster these days. Java is still
|
||
> slow for 2 reasons: 1) Developers who don't optimize their code as
|
||
> they write it, 2) Bytecode interpretation is and probably never will
|
||
> be as fast as something like C/C++. But it certainly isn't the JVM
|
||
> itself slowing it down because of some "extended memory" that it lives
|
||
> in. Any reasonable server should have absolutely no problems if the
|
||
> jvm is implemented _properly_ (which many packages do not do), etc. If
|
||
> you're comparing Java to perl, yes, certainly it's a bit more of a
|
||
> beast, but perl quite simply can't keep up in speed and feature
|
||
> richness (when was the last time you secured your perl code in a
|
||
> redistributable fashion?)
|
||
_WHY_ the heck do all base classes need to be in memory all the time? Why
|
||
are they so huge? Libc is _far far_ smaller, and libstdc++ is tiny
|
||
compared to all the java standard library.
|
||
|
||
You know what the answer to it is: Because they are ALL written in java,
|
||
as opposed to more sane languages like perl which handcode their "standard
|
||
libraries" or the most important pieces of them in C.
|
||
|
||
Perl is far faster than java in about any practical application I did.
|
||
Again, the issue is not speed of JVM versus PP (perl virtual machine), if
|
||
you did number crunching in perl and java, they would probably be at par.
|
||
Its an issue of standard libraries. They are _horribly slow_. Perl's
|
||
hashtables are a very nice piece of optimized C code. Java's hashtables
|
||
are written in Java. Need I say more? Java's AWT was a dog. Swing is a dog
|
||
and a half, because they reimplemented all the things that are commonly
|
||
done in C in Java.
|
||
|
||
> The only mistake the developers can make is poorly implementing the
|
||
> jvm, but most certainly not Java itself. I've been working on
|
||
> architecting and building enterprise level sites and applications for
|
||
> nearly 8 years now, and I've seen too many people try to implement
|
||
> perl cgi websites for enterprise sites and watch them choke and crawl
|
||
> to their knees because of poor system resource handling, lack of
|
||
> scalability, etc... I most certainly don't consider a single webserver
|
||
> with an appserver and tiny database to be enterprise level either (not
|
||
> that I'm inferring you said it was).
|
||
You cannot compare a perl CGI script and a J2EE server. Its like comparing
|
||
a webserver you wrote yourself vs apache! There are application servers
|
||
(or more closely, code libraries) for perl that match what J2EE provides.
|
||
|
||
--
|
||
Alex Pilosov | http://www.acedsl.com/home.html
|
||
CTO - Acecape, Inc. | AceDSL:The best ADSL in the world
|
||
325 W 38 St. Suite 1005 | (Stealth Marketing Works! :)
|
||
New York, NY 10018 |
|
||
|
||
|
||
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
|
||
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
|
||
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
|
||
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
|
||
|
||
From pgsql-hackers-owner+M14652=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org Thu Oct 25 22:24:44 2001
|
||
Return-path: <pgsql-hackers-owner+M14652=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org>
|
||
Received: from rs.postgresql.org (server1.pgsql.org [64.39.15.238] (may be forged))
|
||
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f9Q1Oim04694
|
||
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:24:44 -0400 (EDT)
|
||
Received: from postgresql.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
|
||
by rs.postgresql.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id f9Q1CeR31737
|
||
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 20:21:26 -0500 (CDT)
|
||
(envelope-from pgsql-hackers-owner+M14652=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org)
|
||
Received: from smaug.polygnosis.com (smaug.polygnosis.com [195.139.160.201])
|
||
by postgresql.org (8.11.3/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f9Q16NP39474
|
||
for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:06:23 -0400 (EDT)
|
||
(envelope-from gunnar@smaug.polygnosis.com)
|
||
Received: (from gunnar@localhost)
|
||
by smaug.polygnosis.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) id f9Q15nC01560;
|
||
Fri, 26 Oct 2001 03:05:49 +0200
|
||
To: tweekie <None@news.tht.net>
|
||
cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
|
||
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] java virtual machine
|
||
References: <3bd825e2_1@Usenet.com>
|
||
From: Gunnar =?iso-8859-1?q?R=F8nning?= <gunnar@polygnosis.com>
|
||
Date: 26 Oct 2001 03:05:49 +0200
|
||
In-Reply-To: <3bd825e2_1@Usenet.com>
|
||
Message-ID: <m28zdzmcr6.fsf@smaug.polygnosis.com>
|
||
Lines: 19
|
||
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7
|
||
MIME-Version: 1.0
|
||
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
|
||
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
|
||
Precedence: bulk
|
||
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
|
||
Status: OR
|
||
|
||
* tweekie <None@news.tht.net> wrote:
|
||
|
|
||
| I asked this question a while back but got no response - is there any way of
|
||
| creating a Java stored procedure in a postgres database ? I can see that
|
||
| there is a built-in PL/sql type of environment and a python one but it would
|
||
| be nice if I could migrate Java stored procedures in an Oracle database into
|
||
| postgres.
|
||
|
|
||
| Any comments?
|
||
|
||
|
||
It would rock ;-) An Hungarian guy just sent a mail indicating that he
|
||
had a first prototype version of something with Kaffe up and running.
|
||
But I believe there is a lot of issues to be solved, especially
|
||
threading issues...
|
||
|
||
--
|
||
Gunnar R<>nning - gunnar@polygnosis.com
|
||
Senior Consultant, Polygnosis AS, http://www.polygnosis.com/
|
||
|
||
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
|
||
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
|
||
|
||
http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
|
||
|
||
From pgsql-general-owner+M18147=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org Mon Dec 3 13:53:24 2001
|
||
Return-path: <pgsql-general-owner+M18147=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org>
|
||
Received: from west.navpoint.com (west.navpoint.com [207.106.42.13])
|
||
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.10.1) with ESMTP id fB3IrNS29264
|
||
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:53:24 -0500 (EST)
|
||
Received: from rs.postgresql.org (server1.pgsql.org [64.39.15.238] (may be forged))
|
||
by west.navpoint.com (8.11.6/8.10.1) with ESMTP id fB3IrO213373
|
||
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:53:24 -0500 (EST)
|
||
Received: from postgresql.org (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||
by rs.postgresql.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id fB3Iq1N35610
|
||
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 12:52:02 -0600 (CST)
|
||
(envelope-from pgsql-general-owner+M18147=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org)
|
||
Received: from tiger.tigrasoft (fw.tigrasoft.hu [195.70.42.161])
|
||
by postgresql.org (8.11.3/8.11.4) with ESMTP id fAU95km73601
|
||
for <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 04:05:46 -0500 (EST)
|
||
(envelope-from hornyakl@freemail.hu)
|
||
Received: from freemail.hu ([192.168.0.200])
|
||
by tiger.tigrasoft (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) with ESMTP id KAA11457
|
||
for <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 10:05:45 +0100
|
||
X-Authentication-Warning: tiger.tigrasoft: Host [192.168.0.200] claimed to be freemail.hu
|
||
Message-ID: <3C074DE4.9040905@freemail.hu>
|
||
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 10:14:12 +0100
|
||
From: Laszlo Hornyak <hornyakl@freemail.hu>
|
||
Reply-To: hornyakl@users.sourceforge.net
|
||
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20010913
|
||
X-Accept-Language: hu, en-us
|
||
MIME-Version: 1.0
|
||
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
|
||
Subject: [GENERAL] java stored procedures
|
||
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
|
||
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
|
||
Precedence: bulk
|
||
Sender: pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org
|
||
Status: OR
|
||
|
||
Hi!
|
||
|
||
A few months ago I asked if anyone started working on PL/JAVA, the
|
||
ansver was no. Now I started to write a java stored procedure language
|
||
and environment for PostgreSQL. Some code is already working, and it is
|
||
geting interresting. So, I would like to ask you to write me your ideas,
|
||
suggestions, etc for this environment.
|
||
The source code will be available under GPL when it is worth for
|
||
distributing it (this will take for a while).
|
||
thanks.
|
||
|
||
Laszlo Hornyak
|
||
|
||
|
||
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
|
||
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
|
||
|
||
From pgsql-general-owner+M18182=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org Tue Dec 4 13:14:09 2001
|
||
Return-path: <pgsql-general-owner+M18182=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org>
|
||
Received: from west.navpoint.com (west.navpoint.com [207.106.42.13])
|
||
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.10.1) with ESMTP id fB4IE3r15972
|
||
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:14:04 -0500 (EST)
|
||
Received: from rs.postgresql.org (server1.pgsql.org [64.39.15.238] (may be forged))
|
||
by west.navpoint.com (8.11.6/8.10.1) with ESMTP id fB4IE2Y07122
|
||
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:14:02 -0500 (EST)
|
||
Received: from postgresql.org (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||
by rs.postgresql.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id fB4I9HN76662
|
||
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:09:17 -0600 (CST)
|
||
(envelope-from pgsql-general-owner+M18182=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org)
|
||
Received: from belphigor.mcnaught.org ([216.151.155.121])
|
||
by postgresql.org (8.11.3/8.11.4) with ESMTP id fB4Hwsm96365;
|
||
Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:58:59 -0500 (EST)
|
||
(envelope-from doug@wireboard.com)
|
||
Received: (from doug@localhost)
|
||
by belphigor.mcnaught.org (8.11.6/8.9.3) id fB4Hwlo07786;
|
||
Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:58:47 -0500
|
||
X-Authentication-Warning: belphigor.mcnaught.org: doug set sender to doug@wireboard.com using -f
|
||
To: Barry Lind <barry@xythos.com>
|
||
cc: Laszlo Hornyak <hornyakl@freemail.hu>, pgsql-general@postgresql.org,
|
||
pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org
|
||
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] java stored procedures
|
||
References: <3C074DE4.9040905@freemail.hu> <3C0BE325.3020809@xythos.com>
|
||
<3C0C937E.9000405@freemail.hu> <3C0CFD82.1030600@xythos.com>
|
||
From: Doug McNaught <doug@wireboard.com>
|
||
Date: 04 Dec 2001 12:58:47 -0500
|
||
In-Reply-To: Barry Lind's message of "Tue, 04 Dec 2001 08:44:50 -0800"
|
||
Message-ID: <m3itbmeujs.fsf@belphigor.mcnaught.org>
|
||
Lines: 42
|
||
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0806 (Gnus v5.8.6) XEmacs/21.1 (20 Minutes to Nikko)
|
||
MIME-Version: 1.0
|
||
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
|
||
Precedence: bulk
|
||
Sender: pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org
|
||
Status: OR
|
||
|
||
Barry Lind <barry@xythos.com> writes:
|
||
|
||
> Having one jvm that all the postgres backend processes communicate with makes
|
||
> the whole feature much more complicated, but is necessary in my opinion.
|
||
|
||
Agreed. Also, the JVM is a multithreaded app, and running it inside a
|
||
non-threaded program (the backend) might cause problems.
|
||
|
||
> Then the question becomes how does the jvm process interact with the database
|
||
> since they are two different processes. You will need some sort of
|
||
> interprocess communication between the two to execute sql statements. This
|
||
> could be accomplished by using the existing jdbc driver. But the bigest
|
||
> problem here is getting the transaction semantics right. How does a sql
|
||
> statement being run by a java stored procedure get access to the same
|
||
> connection/transaction as the original client? What you don't want happening
|
||
> is that sql issued in a stored java procedure executes in a different
|
||
> transaction as the caller, what would rollback of the stored function call
|
||
> mean in that case?
|
||
|
||
I think you would have to to expose the SPI layer to Java running in a
|
||
separate process, either using an RMI server written in C or a custom
|
||
protocol over a TCP socket (Java of course can't do Unix sockets).
|
||
This raises some thorny issues of authentication and security but I
|
||
don't think they're insurmountable. You could, for example, create a
|
||
cryptographically strong "cookie" in the backend when a Java function
|
||
is called. The cookie would be passed to the Java function when it
|
||
gets invoked, and then must be passed back to the SPI layer in order
|
||
for the latter to accept the call. A bit clunky but should be safe as
|
||
far as I can see.
|
||
|
||
The cookie would be needed anyhow, I think, in order for the SPI layer
|
||
to be able to find the transaction that the Java function was
|
||
originally invoked in.
|
||
|
||
You could make the SPI layer stuff look like a normal JDBC driver to
|
||
user code--PL/Perl does this kind of thing with the Perl DBI
|
||
interface.
|
||
|
||
-Doug
|
||
--
|
||
Let us cross over the river, and rest under the shade of the trees.
|
||
--T. J. Jackson, 1863
|
||
|
||
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
|
||
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org
|
||
|