| From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Euler Taveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: libpq compression |
| Date: | 2012-06-16 03:39:49 |
| Message-ID: | CABUevEzvej-V0zfjdyK=BPmpD6DQO=6z2ohxd2HQTzoohQVt5Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 4:04 AM, Euler Taveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com> wrote:
> On 15-06-2012 11:39, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> As long as a free implementation exists, it can be ported to
>> Java/.Net. Sure, it takes more work, but it *can be done*.
>>
> Good point. IMHO, if there isn't a solution that cover all PostgreSQL (it
> seems it is not), we should pick the most appropriate one for *libpq* and let
> other drivers implement it at their time.
Fair enough if we decide that - but we should make that decision
knowing that we're leaving the JDBC and .Net people in a bad position
where they are not likely to be able to implement his.
The JDBC people have a theoretical chance if the JDK is open. The .Net
people are stuck with schannel that doesn't support it at this point.
It might well do in the future (since it's in the standard); but
they're at the mercy of Microsoft.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2012-06-16 03:43:50 | Re: libpq compression |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2012-06-16 03:37:08 | Re: libpq compression |