Re: New ODBC driver

From: markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com
To: "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: New ODBC driver
Date: 2004-12-01 15:01:48
Message-ID: 16614.24.91.171.78.1101913308.squirrel@mail.mohawksoft.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-odbc

>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: pgsql-odbc-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
>> [mailto:pgsql-odbc-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of
>> markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com
>> Sent: 01 December 2004 13:50
>> To: pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
>> Subject: [ODBC] New ODBC driver
>>
>> What would be the best way to go about re-writing the ODBC
>> driver to use libpq? (I haven't looked at the code in years,
>> the last time I looked at it was to find a memory leak.)
>>
>> Is it possible to do it in stages?
>>
>> Is the transport sufficiently separated to do a quick change
>> to use libpq as the transport, and then gradually use more and more?
>>
>> My only concern would be that a re-write would re-break a lot
>> of functionality.
>
> I haven't looked at it in depth, but I think you will essentially just
> need to rewrite connection.c as a libpq wrapper.
>
> I don't think it would be realistic to mix the two approaches though -
> if only because they couldn't share a single database connection.

Why is this an issue? Why not create multiple connections?

>
> Regards, Dave.

In response to

Browse pgsql-odbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message markw 2004-12-01 16:20:54 Re: New ODBC driver
Previous Message Dave Page 2004-12-01 14:53:02 Re: New ODBC driver