SEO

I am investigating the possibility of having stored procedures
and functions written in .NET language flavors. I remember a long time
ago there was a gborg project wanting to implement it, but that is long
gone I guess. anyway....

I think there are two possibilities:

a) Use of MS.NET core and implement it only for Windows.
b) Use of Mono core and have the possibility to run it also on *nix systems.
c) Or perhaps a hybrid of the above would be possible.

Any implementation would require to invoke/call an external runtime (Mono or
MS.CRL).
I wonder what the performance would be.

I would like to have your opinion about this idea.

Regards,
Gevik Babakhani

------------------------------------------------
PostgreSQL NL http://www.postgresql.nl
TrueSoftware BV http://www.truesoftware.nl
------------------------------------------------


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

Hello

I thought about it. It can be great project. Oracle has similar
project. Performance will be same as PL/Java probably. There is slow
only first call.

Regards
Pavel Stehule



On 30/11/2007, Gevik Babakhani <pgdev@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
> I am investigating the possibility of having stored procedures
> and functions written in .NET language flavors. I remember a long time
> ago there was a gborg project wanting to implement it, but that is long
> gone I guess. anyway....
>
> I think there are two possibilities:
>
> a) Use of MS.NET core and implement it only for Windows.
> b) Use of Mono core and have the possibility to run it also on *nix systems.
> c) Or perhaps a hybrid of the above would be possible.
>
> Any implementation would require to invoke/call an external runtime (Mono or
> MS.CRL).
> I wonder what the performance would be.
>
> I would like to have your opinion about this idea.
>
> Regards,
> Gevik Babakhani
>
> ------------------------------------------------
> PostgreSQL NL http://www.postgresql.nl
> TrueSoftware BV http://www.truesoftware.nl
> ------------------------------------------------
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
>

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at

http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

On Nov 30, 2007 8:31 AM, Gevik Babakhani <pgdev@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> I am investigating the possibility of having stored procedures
> and functions written in .NET language flavors. I remember a long time
> ago there was a gborg project wanting to implement it, but that is long
> gone I guess. anyway....

Yeah, I have a copy of the old PL/.NET backed up somewhere. IIRC, it
needs to be rewritten, but it would be possible to make it work for
both Mono and .NET.

--
Jonah H. Harris, Sr. Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1324
EnterpriseDB Corporation | fax: 732.331.1301
499 Thornall Street, 2nd Floor | jonah.harris@enterprisedb.com
Edison, NJ 08837 | http://www.enterprisedb.com/

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at

http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

On Nov 30, 2007 9:20 AM, Jonah H. Harris <jonah.harris@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah, I have a copy of the old PL/.NET backed up somewhere. IIRC, it
> needs to be rewritten, but it would be possible to make it work for
> both Mono and .NET.

Actually, it was PL/Mono. I'll dig through my stuff and post it
somewhere for you.

--
Jonah H. Harris, Sr. Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1324
EnterpriseDB Corporation | fax: 732.331.1301
499 Thornall Street, 2nd Floor | jonah.harris@enterprisedb.com
Edison, NJ 08837 | http://www.enterprisedb.com/

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq

It would we great. Thank you.

Regards,
Gevik Babakhani
------------------------------------------------
PostgreSQL NL http://www.postgresql.nl
TrueSoftware BV http://www.truesoftware.nl
------------------------------------------------


> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
> [mailtogsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of
> Jonah H. Harris
> Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 4:10 PM
> To: Gevik Babakhani
> Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] .NET or Mono functions in PG
>
> On Nov 30, 2007 9:20 AM, Jonah H. Harris
> <jonah.harris@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Yeah, I have a copy of the old PL/.NET backed up somewhere.
> IIRC, it
> > needs to be rewritten, but it would be possible to make it work for
> > both Mono and .NET.
>
> Actually, it was PL/Mono. I'll dig through my stuff and post
> it somewhere for you.
>
> --
> Jonah H. Harris, Sr. Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1324
> EnterpriseDB Corporation | fax: 732.331.1301
> 499 Thornall Street, 2nd Floor |
> jonah.harris@enterprisedb.com
> Edison, NJ 08837 | http://www.enterprisedb.com/
>
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
>


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 02:31:44PM +0100, Gevik Babakhani wrote:
>
> I am investigating the possibility of having stored procedures
> and functions written in .NET language flavors. I remember a long time
> ago there was a gborg project wanting to implement it, but that is long
> gone I guess. anyway....
>
> I think there are two possibilities:
>
> a) Use of MS.NET core and implement it only for Windows.
> b) Use of Mono core and have the possibility to run it also on *nix systems.
> c) Or perhaps a hybrid of the above would be possible.
>
> Any implementation would require to invoke/call an external runtime (Mono or
> MS.CRL).
> I wonder what the performance would be.
>
> I would like to have your opinion about this idea.

I did look at this at some earlier point as well. One big problem at that
time was that once you embedded mono, yuo had all sorts of threads running
in your backend ;-)

Another way to do it is "the PL/J" way (I think). Which is starting up a
separate process with the VM in it and then do RPC of some kind to it.
Which has more overhead per call, but lower per backend etc. And a lot less
"dangerous".

I never got past the thinking stage though. But it would certanily be nice
to have!

//Magnus

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at

http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

> I did look at this at some earlier point as well. One big
> problem at that time was that once you embedded mono, you had
> all sorts of threads running in your backend ;-)

yes, threads running around could become a show stopper for both Mono and
MS.NET
This is something I want to be sure of before I begin.

> Another way to do it is "the PL/J" way (I think). Which is
> starting up a separate process with the VM in it and then do
> RPC of some kind to it.
> Which has more overhead per call, but lower per backend etc.
> And a lot less "dangerous".

This is actually my plan B, hence it is less dangerous.
I am thinking the "started process" can stay alive and act
as a service of some kind to handle/answer calls form multiple
backends and shutdown itself after a period of time being
idle.


Regards,
Gevik Babakhani
------------------------------------------------
PostgreSQL NL http://www.postgresql.nl
TrueSoftware BV http://www.truesoftware.nl
------------------------------------------------





---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 04:43:03PM +0100, Gevik Babakhani wrote:
> > I did look at this at some earlier point as well. One big
> > problem at that time was that once you embedded mono, you had
> > all sorts of threads running in your backend ;-)
>
> yes, threads running around could become a show stopper for both Mono and
> MS.NET
> This is something I want to be sure of before I begin.

Yaeh.

> > Another way to do it is "the PL/J" way (I think). Which is
> > starting up a separate process with the VM in it and then do
> > RPC of some kind to it.
> > Which has more overhead per call, but lower per backend etc.
> > And a lot less "dangerous".
>
> This is actually my plan B, hence it is less dangerous.
> I am thinking the "started process" can stay alive and act
> as a service of some kind to handle/answer calls form multiple
> backends and shutdown itself after a period of time being
> idle.

Yes, you should have just one such process with .Net managed threads
running inside it. You just need to find a good RPC library to pass things
back and forth between the backend running natively and this special
process running in .net.

//Magnus

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

On Nov 30, 2007 10:09 AM, Jonah H. Harris <jonah.harris@gmail.com> wrote:
> Actually, it was PL/Mono. I'll dig through my stuff and post it
> somewhere for you.

Just searched my backups and can't seem to find it It was on gborg
CVS. Where is that now?

--
Jonah H. Harris, Sr. Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1324
EnterpriseDB Corporation | fax: 732.331.1301
499 Thornall Street, 2nd Floor | jonah.harris@enterprisedb.com
Edison, NJ 08837 | http://www.enterprisedb.com/

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> On Nov 30, 2007 10:09 AM, Jonah H. Harris <jonah.harris@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Actually, it was PL/Mono. I'll dig through my stuff and post it
>> somewhere for you.
>
> Just searched my backups and can't seem to find it It was on gborg
> CVS. Where is that now?

Dead.
But Marc has a tarball of the whole thing somewhere and can find it.

//Magnus

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match