Re: [Patch] Binary Transfer v12

From: Mikko Tiihonen <mikko(dot)tiihonen(at)nitorcreations(dot)com>
To: Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>
Cc: Jesper Pedersen *EXTERN* <jesper(dot)pedersen(at)jboss(dot)org>, pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [Patch] Binary Transfer v12
Date: 2009-06-03 08:00:34
Message-ID: 4A262DA2.5050209@nitorcreations.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbc

Albe Laurenz wrote:
> Jesper Pedersen wrote:
>> I have updated the binary transfer patch against latest CVS/HEAD.
>>
>> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/JDBC-BinaryTransfer
>
> Sounds great!
>
> Did you test it with both little-endian and big-endian servers?
> With 32-bit and 64-bit servers?

I have only tested with 64bit amd64 servers.

Luckily the protocol is well defined to always use network byte order:
http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/protocol-message-types.html

The incompatible bits of the protocol are in feature flags.

For example the time can either be a double as seconds or long as microseconds.
The default has just changed in 8.4, but the binary transfer patch has supported
both since the beginning.

> I don't know for sure, but all this *might* affect the binary format.

But now you got me wondering...

The protocol messages itself are well defined, but I cannot find any
documentation about the data value contents because there is no official
documentation. I had to just guess how the values are stored. Based on the data
type byte sizes in database, for example look here:
http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/datatype-datetime.html

-Mikko

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Albe Laurenz 2009-06-03 09:14:54 Re: [Patch] Binary Transfer v12
Previous Message Albe Laurenz 2009-06-03 07:29:24 Re: [Patch] Binary Transfer v12