Re: libpq and prepared statements progress for 8.0

Greg Stark wrote:
> Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com> writes:
>
>>There *are* benefits to implementing the protocol directly. First on my
>>personal list is that our Java application would not be able to use postgresql
>>at all if the driver required JNI/libpq.
>
>
> Well benefits that boil down to "Java sucks" aren't very convincing. Perl
> suffers from no such handicap.

Arguing that Java-specific benefits are not convincing benefits for a
JDBC driver because you don't get them in Perl seems a bit odd to me.
You're not implementing the driver in Perl!

Anyway, it's not a language issue so much as a support issue. We're not
in a position to build and support libpq and a JNI interface to it on a
large range of hardware platforms, but we can get 3rd party support for
JVMs on those platforms just fine.

> Incidentally, does the JDBC spec really allow for multiple-statement queries
> at all?

No, but it's a common extension, and earlier driver versions (talking
only V2) supported it.

-O