Re: ODBC driver for Windows & future... - Mailing list pgsql-odbc
From | Shachar Shemesh |
---|---|
Subject | Re: ODBC driver for Windows & future... |
Date | |
Msg-id | 41AE0A24.5050406@shemesh.biz Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: ODBC driver for Windows & future... (Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com>) |
List | pgsql-odbc |
Richard Huxton wrote: > AFAIK no substantial changes have been made in the ODBC driver > recently. Dave generously stepped forward to look after the project > until a lead developer came forward. We're still waiting for that > person to come forward. Hi, I just wanted to chip in with a slightly irrelevant info. Those who don't know me - I'm the CEO of Lingnu Open Source Consulting (http://www.lingnu.com). We are the ones who wrote the OLE DB provider for Postgresql (http://gborg.postgresql.org/projects/oledb). It was done as a payed job by a client who needed OLE DB support. While not complete, it is already working fairly well. More to the point, OLE DB uses libpq as a backend. While this did save us from rewriting the protocol (we started work after 7.4 was already out, so protocol versions was not an issue), it did introduce some points that had better be considered. As far as I know, OLE DB is the only driver currently using libpq. Some aspects of memory allocation and thread safety make it a little difficult to scale further reliably. These are not crucial problems, but they are things to consider when developing a driver (as opposed to an end application). Also of interest is that this very same client is also interested in the ODBC driver for a different project. We have already did some porting of their application, and have spotted a serious performance issue with ODBC when long query results are retrieved. It is possible (thought it would be best not to count on it) that we will do some work in that direction on ODBC in the foreseeable future. The reason we did not step forward and offered ourselves as full maintainers of the code is that we don't feel we have the resources for that. It is good to know, however, that the facilities for sending patches and having them committed exists. >> On Windows platforms ODBC will remain the default method to quickly >> link a Database with any number of applications for some time to >> come. > > > The central problem is that none of us have the skills and/or time to > build/maintain an ODBC driver even though we'd all like to see > updates. There are three options I can see possible: > 1. Someone steps up and takes over development as before Like I said, that is unlikely to be us, unless we get paid for it. It seems we are going to be learning at least some of the code (and have submitted a modest patch in the past, in fact). If someone with more ODBC experience exists, however, I think it would be best to let them do this task. We are maintaining OLE DB already, and do not really seek the position of "master of Postgresql drivers". > 2. Increased use by Windows users leads to a Windows developer to step > forward and go to #1 That's how free software usually works. > 3. The ODBC driver is replaced with a wrapper to another driver > (JDBC/.Net) hopefully reducing the maintenance requirements. Now I don't know JDBC and .Net very well. If they are anything like OLE DB, that's not going to be a simple one. The interfaces are fairly incompatible. > There is an ODBC=>JDBC gateway out there (closed-source I believe) but > I don't know of a .Net one. Shachar P.S. While I won't claim that the OLE DB driver is as complete as the JDBC or .Net ones (or the ODBC one, while we're at it), I'd just like to make sure that the reason it wasn't mentioned was this rather than ignorance. Sh. -- Shachar Shemesh Lingnu Open Source Consulting ltd. http://www.lingnu.com/
pgsql-odbc by date: