| From: | M(dot)Feldtmann(at)t-online(dot)de (Marten Feldtmann) |
|---|---|
| To: | "Chris Bitmead" <chrisb(at)nimrod(dot)itg(dot)telstra(dot)com(dot)au>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "pgsql-oo(at)postgreSQL(dot)org" <pgsql-oo(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternative new libpq interface. |
| Date: | 2000-07-10 18:37:33 |
| Message-ID: | 13BiKJ-1hG9iaC@fwd02.sul.t-online.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 15:50:13 +1000, Chris Bitmead wrote:
>
>My idea is that there should be a very low level interface that has a
>minimum of bloat and features and caching and copying. This would be
>especially nice for me writing an ODMG interface because the ODMG
>interface would be needing to cache and copy things about so having
>libpq doing it too is extra overhead. It could also form the basis of
>a trivial re-implementation of the current libpq in terms of this
>interface.
What does it mean: ODMG interface. I've the ODMG 3.0 book in front
of me and i do not know, what you would like to create ... why is
caching and copying a need for ODMG ???
Marten Feldtmann
----
Marten Feldtmann, Germany
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2000-07-10 18:52:32 | Re: Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL vs. MySQL |
| Previous Message | Karel Zak | 2000-07-10 18:33:37 | Re: Distribution making |