| From: | Omar Bettin <o(dot)bettin(at)tiscali(dot)it> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: communication protocol |
| Date: | 2007-08-10 11:10:32 |
| Message-ID: | 46BC47A8.1080606@tiscali.it |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hannu Krosing wrote:
> Ühel kenal päeval, N, 2007-08-09 kell 17:12, kirjutas Omar Bettin:
>
>
>
> Why not just set up an ssh2 tunnel with both encryption and compression
> and access your remote db over that ?
>
>
I know that possibility, but I'm just thinking probably an "ad hoc"
protocol for applications that needs to locate, range, skip, lookup,
bookmark etc... a lot
of records, could increase the system performance.
By that, I don't want to discuss about PostgreSQL performance by itself
but about a to much "generalist" protocol.
With libpq, after you got the result, you have to implement locally some
find, range etc, routines and on the other side there is a DBMS born to
do that!
My application need both type of connection LAN/WAN and here (in Italy)
still some lack of wide-band infrastructure.
Also installing certificates on a LAN contest is a bit a "dirty" way to
solve the problem.
Omar
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2007-08-10 11:26:40 | regexp_split_to_array hangs backend |
| Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 2007-08-10 10:47:12 | Re: crypting prosrc in pg_proc |