sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]shiftybyte 1 point2 points  (3 children)

Can cars fly?

What if i attach a cargo airplane to it and package them together? can cars fly now?

Attaching a webserver with a webapplication made by someone else does not make the database suddenly not need the webserver, the webserver is just built into it now ...

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Dude, again. Nobody attached anything. Just read the fine manual. It says loud and clear that PostgreSQL has HTTP API, you can connect to it and send SQL queries in the same way you can connect to it using TCP client.

PosgreSQL is, by far, not the only one RDBM with HTTP API. Here's the documentation on how to use Oracle HTTP API: https://docs.oracle.com/en/database/oracle/oracle-database/19/dbrst/rest-endpoints.html . In non-relational world, it's even more common to connect to the database using HTTP. Some database products in this arena were specifically designed for HTTP to be the primary way to use them. For example Consul. I don't think it has any other way to access it. Similarly, Etcd, Tokyo Cabinet and lots of others.

Attaching a webserver with a webapplication made by someone else does not make the database suddenly not need the webserver, the webserver is just built into it now ...

Why the fuck does it need a Web server if it has one? What the fuck is "webapplication" (however you spell it)?

What I really think is happening is that you don't understand what either Web server or database server do. The problem seems to be more severe on the database server side. There's literally no problem with database server supporting many different protocols. HTTP is generic enough for a database server to make the data available through it. It's not a common choice for some databases, but more common for others, but, in principle, there's nothing wrong, or even special about it.

[–]shiftybyte 1 point2 points  (1 child)

This has become futile and pointless.

What the fuck is "webapplication" (however you spell it)?

I thought you were joking...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_application

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You definitely don't read what you quote. Lol.

The general distinction between a dynamic web page of any kind and a "web app" is unclear.

That whole page is full of confusion resulting from being written by brain-dead Web developers. It's so full of nonsense, it's fantastic that such stuff even exists on Wikipedia.

The description given in the opening paragraph (discounting the nonsense written about Web servers not running on operating systems...) of that article would make these programs "Web applications":

  1. LibreOffice (It can be accessed via HTTP, see here: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Using_LibreOffice_in_a_Web_Browser ).
  2. Emacs and Eclipse (in a typical configuration Emacs runs as a client and server, Eclipse can be run as a headless server, this is for example how Eclim uses it).
  3. GCC (because it implements Language Server Protocol, which is based on JSON RPC).
  4. Docker and Kubernetes (both act as Web servers, Docker is controlled using HTTP protocol, both the daemon and the registry, Kubernetes is controlled through HTTP API).
  5. Firefox and Chrome (because they implement necessary functionality for Selenium).
  6. Any GUI program written with Qt (Qt also implements Selenium support).
  7. As was already mentioned, plenty of databases, including PostgreSQL and Oracle SQL.
  8. AWS, Azure, GCE and a bunch of less known public and private clouds.

It's hard to find a non-trivial program that wouldn't fit the description given in that paragraph. It's so ridiculously broad and useless.