Re: C vs. C++ contributions

From: Marc Lavergne <mlavergne-pub(at)richlava(dot)com>
To: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: C vs. C++ contributions
Date: 2002-08-28 04:39:03
Message-ID: 3D6C53E7.2030608@richlava.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

That's an quite a bite to chew given my level of experience with
PostgreSQL internals! However, I will keep it in mind and whatever I do
will be fully abstracted (already is actually) so that it should just a
matter of snapping it into place when 7.4 forks. Realistically, I can't
comment from an informed position on this yet. When I get a chance to
look into what is happening in 7.3 and the 7.4 roadmap, I will post back
if I feel I can provide something of substance.

Cheers,

Marc

Neil Conway wrote:
> Marc Lavergne <mlavergne-pub(at)richlava(dot)com> writes:
>
>>PostgreSQL parse/bind/execute Layer:
>>------------------------------------
>>This would be mimicked since PostgreSQL doesn't support it
>>natively.
>
>
> What's stopping you from implementing native support for this? There
> will hopefully be an FE/BE protocol change during the 7.4 development
> cycle, which should give you the opportunity to make any
> protocol-level changes required to implement this properly.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Neil
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gavin Sherry 2002-08-28 06:26:47 Re: [HACKERS] Proposed GUC Variable
Previous Message Neil Conway 2002-08-28 04:33:26 Re: fix for palloc() of user-supplied length