From: | Travis Wellman <travis(at)traviswellman(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>,Luca Ferrari <fluca1978(at)infinito(dot)it> |
Cc: | List <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: supporting any/all connection types including unix domain sockets |
Date: | 2015-07-16 17:08:34 |
Message-ID: | F1336189-479C-4792-821B-084119D42400@traviswellman.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
Is it the same protocol?
On July 16, 2015 3:31:13 AM PDT, Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com> wrote:
>On 16 July 2015 at 02:21, Luca Ferrari <fluca1978(at)infinito(dot)it> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Travis Wellman
>> <travis(at)traviswellman(dot)com> wrote:
>> > Because I need to be able to connect in whatever way was previously
>> > configured.
>>
>> Then I'll take a look at libpq details.
>> However, I believe this is not the right path, I mean there's nothing
>> insecure in configuring a single user to access via tcp/ip (secure)
>> sockets and use well tested jdbc code.
>> My 2cents.
>>
>> Luca
>>
>
>Yes, the notion would be to hook into the JDBC code with something that
>communicated with sockets instead
>
>Dave Cramer
>
>dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca
>http://www.credativ.ca
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Luca Ferrari | 2015-07-17 07:55:07 | Re: supporting any/all connection types including unix domain sockets |
Previous Message | Dave Cramer | 2015-07-16 10:31:13 | Re: supporting any/all connection types including unix domain sockets |