On 2004.04.26, Bob Woodside <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The nssolid module, and hence Tom's nsunixodbc module based on it, and > the modified ODBC3 version I cloned from that, support a few more ns_ > functions than the old nsodbc, and lack none that nsodbc has. It has > DbFn_DbType, DbFn_Select, DbFn_DML functions, which nsodbc does not.
What's funny is if you only implement DbFn_Exec and not DbFn_Select and DbFn_DML, the DB API will call the DbFn_Exec when you try [ns_db select] and [ns_db dml] -- it's clever that way. Implementing DbFn_DbType is trivial. :-) > My feeling was that since this module is a bit newer and cleaner than > the old one, has more informative logging, and supports more functions, > it would be a good candidate to replace the old nsodbc module > altogether. I likewise do not wish to see a plethora of specialized ODBC > modules floating around, and I don't think there's a need for it. I've > tested Tom's module (and my modified version) under both unixODBC and > iODBC, with both mySQL and PostgreSQL, and it works fine. It shouldn't > be too difficult to get it to build under Windows (but I haven't had > time to look into it over the past month). I'm thinking that given the fixes I've put into the original nsodbc, the only things it's currently missing: 1) More "informative" logging -- not exactly sure what this means. I need to find out. 2) ODBC v3 support -- yes, I should be able to add this to nsodbc, at worst by merging the changes in nsunixodbc back into nsodbc. 3) Transaction support. Trivial change to nsodbc. > I don't know of a good reason why we couldn't make a single ODBC > module that works on all platforms (and maybe clean up the > documentation to state so), as well as add some new functionality to > it (e.g., explicit transaction support); and I think that Tom's module > would be the best base for that. Why? nsodbc, as far as my testing went, works ... AND supports Redbrick ODBC as well, which I'm sure nsunixodbc probably doesn't. Not that Redbrick support is so very critical, but I'm always in favor of keeping functionality that works and adding to it, rather than dropping it without good reason (and "isn't so widely used" isn't a good reason if there ARE folks using it, and I know AOL still uses Redbrick and nsodbc even today). -- Dossy -- Dossy Shiobara mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Panoptic Computer Network web: http://www.panoptic.com/ "He realized the fastest way to change is to laugh at your own folly -- then you can let go and quickly move on." (p. 70) -- AOLserver - http://www.aolserver.com/ To Remove yourself from this list, simply send an email to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with the body of "SIGNOFF AOLSERVER" in the email message. You can leave the Subject: field of your email blank.
