The odbc driver must be doing the same thing, as well I suspect pgadmin has a protocol stack built into it as well?
There is a jdbc driver for postgresql on sourceforge that does use libpq. The fact that it is not widely used should be educational. Dave On Thu, 2004-09-16 at 01:11, Greg Stark wrote: > Oliver Jowett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > Well benefits that boil down to "Java sucks" aren't very convincing. Perl > > > suffers from no such handicap. > > > > Arguing that Java-specific benefits are not convincing benefits for a JDBC > > driver because you don't get them in Perl seems a bit odd to me. You're not > > implementing the driver in Perl! > > Er, we're kind of on two different wavelengths here. What I'm trying to > determine are what are the benefits of writing a pure-perl driver versus one > that implements the protocol in a C module, versus one that merely interfaces > with libpq. > > The current Perl module interfaces with libpq. The closest analogue to use for > comparison is the JDBC driver which is a pure-Java implementation. So the > benefits and disadvantages the JDBC driver faces are useful data points. > However benefits that arise purely because of quirks of Java and don't relate > to Perl are less relevant than benefits and disadvantages that are more > general. > > I wasn't trying to criticize the decisions behind the JDBC implementation. It > may well be that the choice that makes sense for Java isn't the same as the > choice that makes sense in other languages. Or it may be that there are > lessons that can be learned from Java that generalize to other languages and > a pure perl implementation may make sense. -- Dave Cramer 519 939 0336 ICQ # 14675561 www.postgresintl.com ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
