On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 22:20:25 -0400, Sean Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I had thought about Class::DBI, but the overhead
> bothers me a bit as does the need to describe the table structure (which I
> am trying to get away from a bit, as it seems to be changing often).

The nice thing about using Class:DBI is that you only need to specify
the columns in a single place. If you're changing your DB schema,
you're going to have to notate that somewhere in your code anyway. So
you do it one place in your class definition, and you're all set.

As for the overhead, it hasn't bothered me (or nearly anyone of the
CDBI list) yet. The maintainer's philosophy is that he's more worried
about getting the functionality right, and then he'll look at
optimizing the queries. More recent releases have (mostly
undocumented)  support for joins so I think performance is starting to
get more attention. But the majority of people will never have
problems.

Drew
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
 Drew Taylor                 *  Web development & consulting
 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  *  Site implementation & hosting
 Web  : www.drewtaylor.com   *  perl/mod_perl/DBI/mysql/postgres
 ----------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Web Archive:  http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
              http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=cgiapp&r=1&w=2
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to