Thread: 2 patches
Two small patches are attached, both against current CVS: 1. Some security, since we now have vsnprintf, I remade an old patch with some extra ugly sprintfs fixed. More work in thisarea is needed still. (pg.diff.gz) 2. Is a experimental patch to libpq and psql to make XML output an alternative to to traditional and HTML3 output. (pg2.diff.gz) I been think about making XML an alternative FE/BE protocol, but for now I implemented a hack on the client side. Check it out as a basis for discussion of structure etc. mvh, -- ----------------- Göran Thyni This is Penguin Country. On a quiet night you can hear Windows NT reboot!
[Charset iso-8859-1 unsupported, filtering to ASCII...] > > Two small patches are attached, both against current CVS: > > 1. Some security, since we now have vsnprintf, I remade an old patch > with some extra ugly sprintfs fixed. More work in this area is > needed still. (pg.diff.gz) Applied to CURRENT tree. > > 2. Is a experimental patch to libpq and psql to make XML output an > alternative to to traditional and HTML3 output. (pg2.diff.gz) Not applied, as you suggested. -- Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania19026
Yesterday I posted a quick patch to make libpq able to output some home brew (but valid) XML as an alternative to normal and HTML3 output. The propose was to start a discussion how we could use XML in PgSQL. I mentioned in my previous mail I would like to use XML in the FE/BE protocol. That would leav us with 3 protocols, the current one, CORBA and XML. But I would argue that CORBA and XML are more related since they are both object based. In the long run the current protocol could be dropped. Pro and cons of using XML: + Object-oriented (fits well with our ORDBMS project) + Clear text (easily debugged) + Easliy display in next generation network tools (even without middleware in some cases) + In coupled to DOM, easily manipulatable both on server and/or client side. - In theory a little slower than an binary protocol. XML is a buzzword, but it has enormous potential, and it is not foreign to the pgsql community since we are already using the father of XML (SGML) for the docs. Suggestion: CORBA and XML should replace current FE/BE-protocol for v. 7.0 Comments? best regards and a wishes for a good 1999, -- ----------------- Göran Thyni This is Penguin Country. On a quiet night you can hear Windows NT reboot!
> XML is a buzzword, but it has enormous potential, > and it is not foreign to the pgsql community since > we are already using the father of XML (SGML) for > the docs. > > Suggestion: > CORBA and XML should replace current FE/BE-protocol for v. 7.0 > Comments? I vote against it. Maybe nice to have as an extra, but the base protocol seems to work well, and is fast. -- Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania19026
Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > XML is a buzzword, but it has enormous potential, > > and it is not foreign to the pgsql community since > > we are already using the father of XML (SGML) for > > the docs. > > > > Suggestion: > > CORBA and XML should replace current FE/BE-protocol for v. 7.0 > > Comments? > > I vote against it. Maybe nice to have as an extra, but the base > protocol seems to work well, and is fast. You are right, let me rephrase myself: - the "base protocol" might become obsolite if and when we have a better object base alternative (CORBA and/or XML). - this might be the case for v. 7.0 or later. This is an idea for a game plan: 1. Make a proxy server 2. Integrate it in postmaster when stable (code-wise and protocol-wise) 3. Add closer integration with DB-objects This game plan would perhaps work to get CORBA of the ground too, there might even be sensible to make a common CORBA/XML-proxy. I will look in to this, but will be working out of town for 2 months (mainly feb-mars) so I will not promise anything for 6.5. Any help or input (right now comment on the DTD etc) welcome. regards, -- ----------------- Göran Thyni This is Penguin Country. On a quiet night you can hear Windows NT reboot!
On Sat, 2 Jan 1999, Goran Thyni wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > > XML is a buzzword, but it has enormous potential,
> > > and it is not foreign to the pgsql community since
> > > we are already using the father of XML (SGML) for
> > > the docs.
> > >
> > > Suggestion:
> > > CORBA and XML should replace current FE/BE-protocol for v. 7.0
> > > Comments?
> >
> > I vote against it. Maybe nice to have as an extra, but the base
> > protocol seems to work well, and is fast.
>
> You are right,
> let me rephrase myself:
> - the "base protocol" might become obsolite if and when we have
> a better object base alternative (CORBA and/or XML).
> - this might be the case for v. 7.0 or later.
Okay, we have to sides to the coin here...Bruce, who feels that our
current protocol is both good and fast, and you, who wants to replace it
:)
My question is simple...what benefit is gained by replacing current
protocol? And, what cons?
Replacing something is great, if there is a reason...what is that reason
and how does that improve us?
Marc G. Fournier
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy@hub.org secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org
Anyone doing serious SGML/XML playing (import/export) from PostgreSQL? I'm going to spend time writing a "journal", which is a generic repository for sequencital storage of incoming XML. Thanks! Clark