Re: Extensibility of the PostgreSQL wire protocol

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 9:42 AM Jonah H. Harris <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> As Jan said in his last email, they're not proposing all the different
>> aspects needed. In fact, nothing has actually been proposed yet. This
>> is an entirely philosophical debate. I don't even know what's being
>> proposed at this point - I just know it *could* be useful. Let's just
>> wait and see what is actually proposed before shooting it down, yes?

> I don't think I'm trying to shoot anything down, because as I said, I
> like extensibility and am generally in favor of it. Rather, I'm
> expressing a concern which seems to me to be justified, based on what
> was posted. I'm sorry that my tone seems to have aggravated you, but
> it wasn't intended to do so.

Likewise, the point I was trying to make is that a "pluggable wire
protocol" is only a tiny part of what would be needed to have a credible
MySQL, Oracle, or whatever clone. There are large semantic differences
from those products; there are maintenance issues arising from the fact
that we whack structures like parse trees around all the time; and so on.
Maybe there is some useful thing that can be accomplished here, but we
need to consider the bigger picture rather than believing (without proof)
that a few hook variables will be enough to do anything.

regards, tom lane