Re: OO / fe-be protocol

Chris Bitmead wrote:
> 
> [Forgive me if you got this already. I don't _think_ it got out last
> time]..
> 
> Casting your minds back again to the discussion a few months ago. I was
> talking about making changes to the fe/be protocol to accomodate the OO
> extensions I was talking about. At the time I mentioned interest in
> fixing some other things while I was there such as adding a streaming
> interface, and perhaps fixing a few other things while I was at it.

I did an clien in pure python for v6.2 an I sure found some things to fix ;)

I also have several other ideas for enchancing it.

So please contact me on this list when you start doing the actual work. 

> Then someone said all the code was going to be discarded anyway and the
> protocol moved to Corba.

Someone was contemplating (maybe even doing _some_ work on) Corba, sorry
but I don't remember who it was.

> So here's the question again. Is Corba really a good thing for a
> database, seeing as a db is concerned with transferring massive chunks
> of simply formatted data.

While it may be a good thing to have a Corba interface to PostgreSQL, 
I don't think it will ever be the main interface.

> I'm no Corba guru, but I would have thought (a)
> Corba would be not very efficient at that sort of thing, probably adding
> big overhead in bytes, and possibly a lot more protocol back and forth,
> and (b) isn't the protocol simple enough anyway that Corba is overkill.

Definitely.

----------------
Hannu