Re: Why isn't Java support part of Postgresql core?

Edson Carlos Ericksson Richter <edsonrichter@xxxxxxxxxxx> · Thu, 18 Sep 2014 18:26:43 -0300



    On 18-09-2014 17:58, cowwoc wrote:

    
      On 18/09/2014 4:26 PM, David G
        Johnston [via PostgreSQL] wrote:

      
            "only PostgreSQL uses it" ... PostgreSQL doesn't use Java.
        
      
      I don't think it makes a difference from a licensing point of
      view. The point is that the JRE is not used to run multiple
      distinct applications.

      
                Also,
                  there is no functional difference between a public and
                  a private JRE.  Pointing pl/java to a private JRE is
                  no more or less secure than pointing it to whatever
                  public JRE the administrator happens to have
                  installed.
              
            
    I've been reading all this stuff.. and I have one simple question:

    
    "dll" doesn't means "dynamic linked library"? Why does PostgreSQL
    needs to statically link to it?

    
    How does all those browsers link to different Java virtual machines?
    Don't they have a dynamic link library that makes a interface to
    them? Can't we use similar approach in PostgreSQL? So each one could
    use the desired JVM, without need to stick to this or that.

    
    Just my 2c... please forgive me if I'm throwing disparate words.

    
    Regards,

    
    Edson