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

Re: Frontend/Backend protocol 3.0

From: "Sivakumar K" <sivakumark(at)pervasive-postgres(dot)com>
To: <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, <fuerth(at)sqlpower(dot)ca>
Cc: <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, <pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Frontend/Backend protocol 3.0
Date: 2005-06-07 05:49:12
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-interfacespgsql-odbc

Hi all,
We, at Pervasive, are working in making the ODBC driver use the libPQ
while retaining the socket connection too (using a compile time flag).
are planning to provide a lump-sum update on this task since it does not
make sense for incremental updates. We are also doing bug-fixing and
open bugs (where we can) in the drivers which are provided as
updates. I will post an email on approach shortly.

Siva Kumar.K

-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-odbc-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
[mailto:pgsql-odbc-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Bruce Momjian
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 5:05 AM
To: Jonathan Fuerth
Cc: Joshua D. Drake; pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [ODBC] Frontend/Backend protocol 3.0

Jonathan Fuerth wrote:
> On Jun 6, 2005, at 5:39 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >>> I don't think I'm the only person who has been suffering from a
> >>> of background knowledge in this regard.
> >> OK, who is working on improving ODBC at this point?  Please give us
> >> status report.
> >
> > My understanding is that there are two ODBC Projects.
> >
> > 1. ODBCng which is the GPL Command Prompt venture
> This seems clear enough--a from-scratch, GPL/commercial licensed ODBC 
> driver which doesn't use libpq and only works with PostgreSQL backend 
>  >=8.0.  Command Prompt will host this separately from the existing 
> psqlodbc project.
> > 2. ODBC which is the original LGPL version and is being worked on by

> > Pervasive.
> I'm fuzzy on this one.  Is pervasive just contributing incremental 
> updates to the existing driver in the existing CVS repository, or will

> they post a lump-sum update to the driver one day, or will they fork 
> the project and host their version on their own site?
> I can't find any evidence that they've publicly forked the project (or

> made any improvements to the odbc driver), but that doesn't mean they 
> haven't been working on something in secret.
> Thanks for helping me discover these other projects.  Now that we can 
> get SQLSTATE from the backend, the driver works with our product
> is not open source).
> The next step will be to optimise SQL INSERT and UPDATE performance, 
> and the most obvious place to start is with the new bind/execute part 
> of the v3 backend protocol.  I'm trying to decide if it's worth 
> implementing on top of our current patched driver, or if I should just

> wait for Pervasive or Command Prompt to do it.

I am fuzzy on what Pervasive is doing and hope they will jump into this

  Bruce Momjian                        |
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?



pgsql-odbc by date

Next:From: selvaraj balasundaramDate: 2005-06-07 07:33:58
Subject: Problem while using Refcursors in Postgres with .NET
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2005-06-06 23:35:01
Subject: Re: Frontend/Backend protocol 3.0

pgsql-interfaces by date

Next:From: selvaraj balasundaramDate: 2005-06-07 07:33:58
Subject: Problem while using Refcursors in Postgres with .NET
Previous:From: Volkan YAZICIDate: 2005-06-05 13:04:47
Subject: Re: libpq, PQExecParams and the inserting of binary data

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group