mirror of https://github.com/postgres/postgres
Bruce Momjian
25 years ago
parent
c992515abc
commit
90670ebdea
@ -0,0 +1,407 @@ |
||||
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 |
||||
> |
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Loading…
Reference in new issue