Subject: Re: Roadmap for FE/BE protocol redesign
From: Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
In-Reply-To: <21985.1047662106@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <19041.1047322279@sss.pgh.pa.us> <3E6EEA9B.3050201@xythos.com>
	<27307.1047485980@sss.pgh.pa.us> <87r89ac6s4.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv>
	<21985.1047662106@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: 
Message-Id: <1047847275.1789.7.camel@fuji.krosing.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: 16 Mar 2003 22:41:15 +0200

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