On 16 Mar 2003, Hannu Krosing wrote:
> Tom Lane kirjutas R, 14.03.2003 kell 19:15:
> > Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu> writes:
> > > So, just to throw out a wild idea: If you're talking about making large
> > > changes to the on-the-wire protocol. Have you considered using an existing
> > > database protocol?
> >
> > What I actually looked into was RDA, but I doubt that TDS would be any
> > closer to our needs...
>
> I remember someone started cleaning up IO in order to move it into a
> separate module with the aim of making multiple implementations (RDA,
> TDS, XML, native JDBC wire protocol if it ever becomes a reality, etc.)
> possible.
That was me, I did an initial cut of separating the FE/BE code from the
rest, but ran short on time. Hoping to get back to it one of these days.
My primary interest was in getting the DRDA protocol supported in a clean
fashion. For those mentioning RDA, I believe that standard is pushing up
the daisys. DRDA is about the only standards game in town at this point,
it has client side support from just about every vendor (IBM obviously,
Oracle, Sybase, MS) and server side support of some sort from DB2 and a
couple others (MS SNA gateway, for example is/has a DRDA server). Mostly
through gateways and add on products, but it's a far cry better than any
other effort I'm aware of.
> While not exactly pertinent to new wire protocol this effort if
> completed would make it much easier to have backwards compatibility on
> the wire level.
I think this would be a good idea all around, and would make future
changes/replacements to FE/BE protocol a lot cleaner.
> ------------
> Hannu
Brian