Hello,
I have to make a small project for my university.. the app has to do this.. I have a client for my server.. and my server is in turn a client for a mysql server.. The client app has to access my server for data stored in a MySQL database.. my server has to then as client to the MySQL server.. get the data and then send to the client app. I have to write my server in C but I can use anything to write my client ( and I chose QT ). What I dream to do is have my server forward every communication that it receives from the client to the MySQL server and vice-versa.. this way I can have the client to my server act like a client to the MySQL server and I don't have to worry about communication protocol betwean my client and the server. Is this possible? Has anyone done it?

Why? MySQL already is a server.

You would be just opening another TCP socket that does nothing else than passing data to/from the TCP/UNIX-socket of the MySQL-server.

If your problem is that the MySQL-deamon doesn't listen to a TCP-socket, but only to a local UNIX socket, then you could remove the line "skip-networking" from the /etc/my.cnf or /etc/mysql/my.cnf file.

No the problem is that I have to write a server for a university project... it just so happens that this server has to move data betwean a mysql server and a client.. I thought the most simple way to do this was to use MySQL client API in the client for my server and my server will do nothing but forward the data to the MySQL client.. I have no intention of working just for fun... I just need to write a server that facilitates the communication betwean a client and a MySQL server.. I thought of this so that my server would get out of having to deal with a protocol betwean my client and my server and then anouther protocol betwean my server and MySQL.

If you want to implement it that way, why don't you send your request directly to the db server?

I think the idea of the assignment is to set up a db server and an application server so that the client doesn't have to know anything about the db.

Suppose you implement it like you suggest, you create SQL statements in your client code and send them to the app server that passes them to the db server. When you decide to change your db for some reason, you will have to change all of your code and upgrade every client.

When you let the app server do the specific SQL handling and you decide to change your db, you only have to change it on the server.

I'm not saying your suggestion doesn't work, but it's bad design. If you won't lose points because of that, go for it anyway because it IS the easiest solution.