RE: Win ODBC drivers for Postgres

Yes, this seems very generalized... and sounds like a marketing speech.
What is the background of this consultant ? Many times, this is only a
matter of who pays him and what he really knows.

Nicolas Huillard

-----Message d'origine-----
De: Byron Nikolaidis [SMTP:byron(dot)nikolaidis(at)home(dot)com]
Date: mercredi 7 juin 2000 23:31
A: Mihai Gheorghiu; pgsql-interfaces(at)postgresql(dot)org
Objet: Re: Win ODBC drivers for Postgres

Hey there partner,

To quote the immortal Butthead: "uhhhh....................., ok."

Seriously, I wonder how this "consultant" came up with this? Sounds
awefully generalized. I think I could say that line about anything,
including ODBC itself.

Also, many of the compromises of the ODBC driver are based on shortcomings
of the backend. Jeez, we still "simulate" a Prepared Statement because
there isn't one in the backend. Is the backend ever gonna have
this?AFAIK,
the JDBC driver simulates the prepared statement also.

Some may remember the "declare/fetch" feature of the ODBC driver, that
makes
use of postgres cursors. This feature was added to help with the network
bandwidth problem -- instead of getting the entire query result, it fetched
it in chunks when required.

Yeah, so maybe connection pooling would be nice, but most things use one or
two connections don't they? Do most processes keep asking odbc for a new
connection?

Byron

----- Original Message -----
From: Mihai Gheorghiu <tanhq(at)bigplanet(dot)com>
To: <pgsql-interfaces(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2000 10:36 AM
Subject: [INTERFACES] Win ODBC drivers for Postgres

> The following is a quote from a consultant's opinion on my intention to
> migrate to Postgresql.
> Quote:
> [ODBC public domain drivers] are immature, inefficient and are network
> bandwidth hogs. The public domain drivers don't support connection
caching
> which reuses an existing database connection for same queries to reduce
the
> query result time.
> Unquote.
> Please comment.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Mihai
>
> PS See also pgsql-general for opinion on Postgres :-)
>