| From: | markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com |
|---|---|
| To: | "Stephen Frost" <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: ODBC Rewrite |
| Date: | 2004-12-07 14:35:34 |
| Message-ID: | 16608.24.91.171.78.1102430134.squirrel@mail.mohawksoft.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-odbc |
> * markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com (markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com) wrote:
>> Looking at both ODBC and libpq and I think that the difference is that
>> libpq aims to make PostgreSQL interfacing easy, while ODBC strives to be
>> a
>> comprehensive SQL interface. 99% of what will be done with the ODBC
>> interface will be simple SQLAllocStmt, SQLPrepare, and SQLExecute.
>
> Saying what 99% of what the ODBC driver does isn't terribly useful-
> What's that 1% that libpq can't do? Having looked at the code, can you
> give us an idea on that?
>
> Stephen
>
Off the top of my head, binding data to the SQL statement, reusing
statements, stuff like that.
The ODBC API isn't designed to talk to any one database, so there are no
short cuts. Unfortunately, applications based on ODBC assume there are no
short cuts, and rely on that behavior.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | markw | 2004-12-07 14:55:23 | Re: ODBC Rewrite |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2004-12-07 14:16:38 | Re: ODBC Rewrite |