> I lean with you and Tom. While running it over the same libpq protocol
> would be helpful in some ways, it would have a lot of drawbacks and
> would really change the function of libpq. I think a separate debugging
> protocol is in order.
Just putting on my network hat for a moment... Would an approach be to come
up with a generic encapsulation protocol, similar in principle to PPP, in
which we could run any protocols we wanted?
If we had something like a PGSQL Encapsulation Protocol (PGEP) used to
transfer all data between a PostgreSQL client/server, then we can use this
to tunnel libpq requests as they are at the moment through to the other
side. However, it would also mean that people could add any other protocols
as they see fit for debugging, statistics and all sorts of things that
people have yet to think of.
Obviously this would require a client/server interface change so it's not to
be taken lightly, but I thought I'd mention it since people have mentioned
the possibility of changes to the FE/BE protocol.
17 Research Way
Tamar Science Park
T: +44 (0)1752 797131
F: +44 (0)1752 791023
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Martin Münstermann||Date: 2005-06-29 09:41:04|
|Subject: symbol name clash with libpq.so: md5_hash|
|Previous:||From: Michael Paesold||Date: 2005-06-29 09:05:24|
|Subject: Re: commit_delay, siblings|