| From: | "Peter Galbavy" <peter(dot)galbavy(at)knowtion(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>, <pgsql-interfaces(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: More thoughts about FE/BE protocol |
| Date: | 2003-04-10 09:07:32 |
| Message-ID: | 003f01c2ff40$9f1a0e70$7c28a8c0@cblan.mblox.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-interfaces |
Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm coming around to the idea that the cleanest solution is to require
> *all* protocol messages, in both directions, to have an initial length
> word. That is, the general message format would look like
> <message type> 1 byte
> <payload length> number of following bytes (4 bytes MSB-first)
> ... message data as needed ...
Is there any message - speaking from a standpoint of a normal user and not a
source hacker WRT postgresql - where knowing the length of the response is
either unknown or is expensive (in buffering) to find out ? This would be
the only disadvantage I can immediately see.
Sorry if I have the wrong end of the stick.
Peter
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | pgsql-bugs | 2003-04-10 12:11:35 | Bug #943: Server-Encoding from EUC_TW to UTF-8 doesn't work |
| Previous Message | Davide Romanini | 2003-04-10 09:04:37 | Charset encoding and accents |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Himmet Karaman | 2003-04-10 12:44:40 | PLEASE HELP ME about choosing entries while entering data to fields |
| Previous Message | Matt Fitzgerald | 2003-04-10 07:32:17 | Re: Getting to learn libpqxx |