Re: Request for comment on setting binary format output per session
От | Merlin Moncure |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Request for comment on setting binary format output per session |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAHyXU0wkg2Gt03q_Xu=BSd3u7hh7X9BL1cd_menH=9Xxb2fkew@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Request for comment on setting binary format output per session (Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: Request for comment on setting binary format output per session
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 9:17 AM Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> wrote:
I think intuitively, this facility ought to work like client_encoding.
There, the client declares its capabilities, and the server has to
format the output according to the client's capabilities. That works,
and it also works through connection poolers. (It is a GUC.) If we can
model it like that as closely as possible, then we have a chance of
getting it working reliably. Notably, the value space for
client_encoding is a globally known fixed list of strings. We need to
figure out what is the right way to globally identify types, like either
by fully-qualified name, by base name, some combination, how does it
work with extensions, or do we need a new mechanism like UUIDs. I think
that is something we need to work out, no matter which protocol
mechanism we end up using.
Fantastic write up.
> globally known fixed list of strings
Are you suggesting that we would have a client/server negotiation such as, 'jdbc<version>', 'all', etc where that would identify which types are done which way? If you did that, why would we need to promote names/uuid to permanent global space?
merlin
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: