| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Atri Sharma <atri(dot)jiit(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, 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 15:36:38 |
| Message-ID: | 9745.1334072198@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-jdbc |
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.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2012-04-10 15:40:42 | Re: To Do wiki |
| Previous Message | Boszormenyi Zoltan | 2012-04-10 15:36:25 | Re: ECPG FETCH readahead |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2012-04-10 15:55:47 | Re: [JDBC] Regarding GSoc Application |
| Previous Message | Atri Sharma | 2012-04-10 15:28:23 | Re: [JDBC] Regarding GSoc Application |