From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Magnus Hagander <mha@sollentuna.net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
Cc: pgsql-interfaces@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Roadmap for FE/BE protocol redesign
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 16:26:24 -0500
Message-ID: <20110.1047331584@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <81124B76C0CF364EBAC6CD213ABEDEF7509DA1@ARGON.edu.sollentuna.se>
References: <81124B76C0CF364EBAC6CD213ABEDEF7509DA1@ARGON.edu.sollentuna.se>
"Magnus Hagander" <mha@sollentuna.net> writes:
> X and Y? Well, the first thing that comes to mind is SSL support. I'm
> not sure if it's still that way, but at least it used to be a pretty
> ugly kludge there with the connection being dropped and re-connected in
> some cases.
SSL support is a bad example, since it would have to be negotiated long
before any more general-purpose negotiation could occur. (You do want
the connection authentication exchange to happen under cover of SSL, no?)
ISTM most of the other features you might want to turn on and off can be
handled as SET commands: the client tries to SET a variable, the backend
either accepts it or returns an error. No need for special protocol
support if you do it that way. Can you point to any examples that have
to have a special protocol feature instead?
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, mha@sollentuna.net, pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Roadmap for FE/BE protocol redesign
In-Reply-To: <20110.1047331584@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox