Re: [HACKERS] Optimize postgres protocol for fixed size arrays - Mailing list pgsql-jdbc

From Oliver Jowett
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Optimize postgres protocol for fixed size arrays
Date
Msg-id CA+0W9LPw_pvsHF9sdpMO=V1A0UG496rdnEw5dNaG0WLG0zR-3A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Optimize postgres protocol for fixed size arrays  (Mikko Tiihonen <mikko.tiihonen@nitorcreations.com>)
List pgsql-jdbc
On 25 November 2011 07:54, Mikko Tiihonen
<mikko.tiihonen@nitorcreations.com> wrote:

> <=BE ParameterStatus(binary_minor = 23)
> FE=> Execute(SET binary_minor = 20)

Yeah this was almost exactly what I was thinking about how to retrofit
it, except it might be clearer to have, say, "supported_binary_minor"
(read-only, advertised by the server on startup) vs. "binary_minor"
(read-write, defaults to 0) as otherwise you have special behavior for
just one parameter where the advertised version doesn't actually match
the currently-set version.

Re list vs. always-incrementing minor version, you could just use an
integer and set bits to represent features, which would keep it simple
but also let clients be more selective about which features they
implement (you could support feature 21 and 23 without supporting 22)

Oliver

pgsql-jdbc by date:

Previous
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: CallableStatement PostgreSQL Error:A CallableStatement was executed with an invalid number of parameters
Next
From: Stevo Slavić
Date:
Subject: Re: Publish 9.1-901 JDBC drivers on maven central