X-Original-To: pgsql-odbc-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 650489DCC35 for ; Fri, 9 Dec 2005 07:40:38 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 57893-10 for ; Fri, 9 Dec 2005 07:40:40 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0CD59DCABD for ; Fri, 9 Dec 2005 07:40:35 -0400 (AST) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1EkgaJ-0005f2-Tf for pgsql-odbc@postgresql.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2005 12:38:44 +0100 Received: from 83.145.96.114 ([83.145.96.114]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 09 Dec 2005 12:38:43 +0100 Received: from Marc.Herbert by 83.145.96.114 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 09 Dec 2005 12:38:43 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: pgsql-odbc@postgresql.org From: Marc Herbert Subject: Re: BLOB handling compatibility with PostgreSQL > 7.4 Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 12:40:15 +0100 Lines: 30 Message-ID: <87r78mh528.fsf@meije.emic.fr> References: <438B792D.6030802@bnl.gov> <200512081911.30002.peter_e@gmx.net> <87zmnah7km.fsf@meije.emic.fr> <200512091206.35456.peter_e@gmx.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.145.96.114 User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) XEmacs/21.4 (Jumbo Shrimp, linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:umy38eVObRgcTHn1xCweek2JJGw= X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.253 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=1.253] X-Spam-Score: 1.253 X-Spam-Level: * X-Archive-Number: 200512/112 X-Sequence-Number: 6591 Peter Eisentraut writes: >> > > So continuent is now writing an ODBC driver for PostgreSQL, or what are > you trying to say? No more than what you'll find at the link above, if you are interested. And you don't have to; this is becoming more and more irrelevant to this list or to this thread. >> Moreover, the respective interfaces have very different semantics >> (pointer or not). This can be a reason in itself to prefer one or the >> other type, whatever the underlying implementation is. > > This is handwaving. Sorry, I don't get this. > I know the section in the documentation; I wrote it. Then thanks in advance for fixing it, putting it in line with what you said above. PS: unless stated otherwise, I read the forums where I post. Thanks in advance for not sending me copies.