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