From: | "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | "Shachar Shemesh" <psql(at)shemesh(dot)biz>, "William ZHANG" <uniware_at_zedware_dot_org(at)antispam(dot)com> |
Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: OLE DB driver |
Date: | 2004-01-12 08:23:01 |
Message-ID: | 03AF4E498C591348A42FC93DEA9661B87203E6@mail.vale-housing.co.uk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shachar Shemesh [mailto:psql(at)shemesh(dot)biz]
> Sent: 11 January 2004 20:21
> To: William ZHANG
> Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] OLE DB driver
>
> >AFAIK, rely on libpq is a fast way but not always convenient.
> >
> >
> Seems like more convinent than hacking the client/server
> protocol myself. I may come up to a wall later on, and then I
> may reconsider.
Seems unlikely - libpq is the definitive implementation of the protocol.
> >
> I did some of that, and did some ODBC hacking too (very
> little). The fact that ODBC uses it's own protocol
> implementation, I think, is a mistake.
Yes, it would be easier if that were not the case - unfortunately that
decision was made many years ago -
http://pluto.iis.nsk.su/postgres95/postgres95.ODBC/
Regards, Dave.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Claudio Natoli | 2004-01-12 09:11:29 | LWLock/ShmemIndex startup question |
Previous Message | Robert Treat | 2004-01-12 04:34:45 | Re: Permissions and PGSQL |