Re: [HACKERS] More PostgreSQL+CORBA

On Sat, 14 Nov 1998, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> > > Except...if I'm understanding even half of this correctly...by
> > > implementing CORBA at the FE/BE level, this effectively eliminates the
> > > need for *us* to maintain a seperate interface for each language we want
> > > to support, since that is what one of CORBA's design goals is...
> > >
> > > In fact, again, if I'm understanding this correctly, this could
> > > potentially open us up to languages we currently don't support...?
> >
> > Yea, that would be neat. But considering no one really totally supports
> > CORBA yet, and we already have tons of working interfaces, perhaps we
> > can consider it in the future, or were you thinking in the next 6-9
> > months?
>
> I think I get it now. Currently, all the non-C interfaces use libpq to
> go over the wire to the backend. If we made the FE/BE protocol CORBA, we
> could modify libpq, and all the current interfaces would still work.
> Then if someone came up with a Smalltalk-to-CORBA interface, they could
> use it for PostgreSQL. Also, if someone came up with a better
> Perl-to-CORBA interface, we could throw ours away, and just use that
> one.

Ya, was talking to Duane today (he's out there somewhere...just
shy or something *grin*) ... he said there is, get this, a COBOL-to-Corba
interface... :)

It basically opens us up to more languages supported without
having to actually support them :)

Marc G. Fournier
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org secondary: scrappy(at){freebsd|postgresql}.org