Em 9/2/2010 12:48, Jim Starkey escreveu:

> Alexander Peshkoff wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday 09 February 2010 05:40:02 Peter Faulks wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Is blr here to stay?
>>>
>>>
>> yes
>>
>>
> Why? It's obsolete. And it's a crutch that lets Firebird from pushing
> SQL into the engine where it belongs.
>

...

> The idea of BLR was to move the cost of language processing from runtime
> to compilation time. It doesn't matter any more.

In my opinion, BLR is to SQL in Firebird what bytecode is to Java source
in Java. I see not much sense in remove (from metadata) it. For adhoc
queries, we'll be able (if desired) to run SQL without generate BLR.

What I think is necessary is that BLR could be upgraded (when restoring
a database) by the engine, so obsolete or changed functionality could be
adapted.

For example, there is current three set of aggregate functions BLR. One
(blr_run_*) is not supported anymore. blr_agg_* is used. And blr_*
(count, average, etc) is something that DSQL could not generate but is
still supported in the engine.


Adriano