Re: [HACKERS] comm patch & ssl patch - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thomas G. Lockhart
Subject Re: [HACKERS] comm patch & ssl patch
Date
Msg-id 356E2D54.417C0941@alumni.caltech.edu
Whole thread Raw
In response to comm patch & ssl patch  (Brett McCormick <brett@work.chicken.org>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] comm patch & ssl patch  (Brett McCormick <brett@work.chicken.org>)
Re: [HACKERS] comm patch & ssl patch  (t-ishii@sra.co.jp (Tatsuo Ishii))
List pgsql-hackers
> I haven't heard much from you guys regarding the backend
> communication, but I figure if I make a good patch that doesn't
> interfere and has positive changes, what have we got to lose.

My impression is that the frontend/backend comm has been less-than-ideal
for some time. Someone submitted patches to fix the reversed network
byte ordering (Postgres sends little-endian using home-grown versions of
the big-endian ntoh/hton routines) but got discouraged when they didn't
quite work right on mixed-order networks.

Anyway, it would be great if a few people would take an interest, as you
have, in cleaning this up. The OOB discussion touches on this also, and
if there are non-backward-compatible changes for v6.4 then you may as
well clean up other stuff while we're at it.

For something as fundamental as client/server communication we should
probably have a few people testing your patches before applying things
to the source tree; I'd be happy to help (but can only test on a
little-endian machine) and Tatsuo in Japan has a mixed-order network
which he has used for extensive testing in the past.

                        - Tom

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Brett McCormick
Date:
Subject: comm patch & ssl patch
Next
From: "Matthew N. Dodd"
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] comm patch & ssl patch