Re: postgres_fdw binary protocol support

From: Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>
To: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Ilya Gladyshev <ilya(dot)v(dot)gladyshev(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: postgres_fdw binary protocol support
Date: 2022-11-23 19:23:45
Message-ID: CAM-w4HPXWYPM7zLfwcHO4KuBb3ZGX7KXiAA0EPzZthvNcBdQhg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, 22 Nov 2022 at 08:17, Ashutosh Bapat
<ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> AFAIU, binary compatibility of two postgresql servers depends upon the
> binary compatibility of the platforms on which they run.

No, libpq binary mode is not architecture-specific. I think you're
thinking of on-disk binary compatibility. But libpq binary mode is
just a binary network representation of the data instead of an ascii
representation. It should be faster and more efficient but it still
goes through binary input/output functions (which aren't named
input/output)

I actually wonder if having this would be a good way to get some code
coverage of the binary input/output functions which I suspect is sadly
lacking now. It wouldn't necessarily test that they're doing what
they're supposed to... but at least they would be getting run which I
don't think they are currently?

--
greg

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mark Dilger 2022-11-23 19:28:14 Re: fixing CREATEROLE
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2022-11-23 19:08:46 Re: Hash index build performance tweak from sorting