| From: | "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | "Martin Pihlak" <martin(dot)pihlak(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Pg Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: SQL/MED compatible connection manager |
| Date: | 2008-12-15 20:30:19 |
| Message-ID: | 36e682920812151230u1f4ca189r1681c29dec2d2e69@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 7:55 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> Now I have a question about the FDW C interface. The way I understand it,
> an SQL/MED-enabled server and a FDW each have a specific API by which they
> communicate. Supposedly, each database vendor should be able to ship a
> binary library for its FDW and each SQL/MED-enabled server should be able to
> load and use it. (If you don't believe in binary compatibility, then I
> think there should at least be source-level interface compatibility.)
Yes, all FDWs should be similar to ODBC drivers in that they are
self-contained and interface with the database through a defined API.
What happens inside them should be irrelevant to PG.
--
Jonah H. Harris, Senior DBA
myYearbook.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2008-12-15 20:37:50 | Re: Function with defval returns error |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2008-12-15 20:21:36 | Re: Sync Rep: First Thoughts on Code |