Greg Stark wrote:
I was pretty shocked when I heard that JDBC implements the low level protocol itself. It seems like a dead-end strategy to me. Any new protocol innovations need to be implemented in every driver. Every implementation gets the chance to reimplement the same bugs and same inefficiencies over and over again.
There *are* benefits to implementing the protocol directly. First on my personal list is that our Java application would not be able to use postgresql at all if the driver required JNI/libpq.
There are also some things in the JDBC API that seem hard to map to the current libpq API, e.g. streaming parameter data from a Java stream without taking an intermediate copy.
The protocol implementation is not really all that complex. The implementation for both V2 and V3 weighs in at ~6k lines of Java out of ~38k total, and much of that is connection-state juggling that we'd have to do anyway if using libpq (working out when to send BEGIN, breaking up multiple-statement queries into individual statements and matching the results up, managing portal state, etc).
-O
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
