Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: ODBC Rewrite

From: Shachar Shemesh <psql(at)shemesh(dot)biz>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com,pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: ODBC Rewrite
Date: 2004-12-07 21:24:32
Message-ID: 41B61F90.6070206@shemesh.biz (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-odbc
Tom Lane wrote:

>Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
>  
>
>>That's not particularly relevant- the question is if the existing libpq
>>API is sufficient for the ODBC driver or not.
>>    
>>
>
>And even more to the point, whether extending it wouldn't be a better
>answer than writing a whole new API (and new library?).  There are
>definitely features of the V3 protocol that are not accessible through
>libpq at the moment, but that is due to lack of time to add appropriate
>API to libpq, not any fundamental objection to extending libpq.
>
>			regards, tom lane
>
>  
>
Can you list them, please?

Having based OLE DB on libpq, it would be nice to find that instead of 
working hard to achieve some stuff via different SQL queries, that I can 
just extend libpq to support easier handling.

In other words, I may find that it is easier to implement certain stuff 
in libpq rather than OLE DB. ODBC may be in the same position. This way, 
everybody win.

          Shachar

-- 
Shachar Shemesh
Lingnu Open Source Consulting ltd.
http://www.lingnu.com/


In response to

Responses

pgsql-odbc by date

Next:From: markwDate: 2004-12-07 21:55:39
Subject: Re: ODBC Rewrite
Previous:From: Eric EDate: 2004-12-07 18:41:14
Subject: Re: ODBC Rewrite

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group