Re: [JDBC] Regarding GSoc Application

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Atri Sharma <atri(dot)jiit(at)gmail(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [JDBC] Regarding GSoc Application
Date: 2012-04-10 15:55:47
Message-ID: 4F845803.8090908@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-jdbc

On 04/10/2012 11:36 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Atri Sharma<atri(dot)jiit(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:55 PM, Tom Lane<tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> Hm? SPI doesn't know anything about Java either.
>> We plan to call SQL through SPI from the FDW,which in turn would call
>> the Pl/Java routine.
> If you're saying that every Java function that the FDW needs would have
> to be exposed as a SQL function, that seems like a pretty high-risk
> (not to mention low performance) approach. Not only do you have to
> design a SQL representation for every datatype you need, but you have to
> be sure that you do not have any security holes arising from
> unscrupulous users calling those SQL functions manually with arguments
> of their choosing.
>
>

Yeah. I think this design is horribly baroque and unnecessary. SPI is
for talking SQL. It's completely in the way of a straight-forward
implementation of this feature IMNSHO.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2012-04-10 15:58:40 Re: Patch: add timing of buffer I/O requests
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2012-04-10 15:55:20 Re: To Do wiki

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Merlin Moncure 2012-04-10 16:07:24 Re: [JDBC] Regarding GSoc Application
Previous Message Tom Lane 2012-04-10 15:36:38 Re: [JDBC] Regarding GSoc Application