Re: Roadmap for FE/BE protocol redesign

Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee>

From: Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2003-03-16T20:41:15Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane kirjutas R, 14.03.2003 kell 19:15:
> Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu> writes:
> > So, just to throw out a wild idea: If you're talking about making large
> > changes to the on-the-wire protocol. Have you considered using an existing
> > database protocol?
> 
> Yeah, I have.  Didn't look promising --- there's no percentage unless
> we're 100% compatible, which creates a lot of problems (eg, can't ship
> type OIDs to frontend anymore).

Surely there is a way to ship type info, even for UDT's (user defined
types) as nowadays most big databases support those.

> What I actually looked into was RDA, but I doubt that TDS would be any
> closer to our needs...

I remember someone started cleaning up IO in order to move it into a
separate module with the aim of making multiple implementations (RDA,
TDS, XML, native JDBC wire protocol if it ever becomes a reality, etc.)
possible.

While not exactly pertinent to new wire protocol this effort if
completed would make it much easier to have backwards compatibility on
the wire level.

------------
Hannu


PS. Another feature I'd like is individually turning off warnings and
notices. 

------------
Hannu