Okay I have enough discussion to create a DBD::Async wrapper which will be used sort of like DBD::Proxy, in terms of how to declare it in the connect string.
Anyone else who wants to be included tighter in the development loop of DBD::Async, for instance to help code, or to test, or to benchmark, please reply to me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] and we can together proceed. No more to dbi-dev until a working release announcement. We're talking about a convention for async drivers to follow, not an extention to DBI. On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:44:51 +0100, Tim Bunce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 03:15:38AM -0500, David Nicol wrote: > > Should I set up an asynchronous DBI mailing list for discussion of > > asynchronous DBI > > or should discussion continue here on dbi-dev? (now I'm talking crazy) > > Here. But... > > > I am also proposing to write at least one wrapper driver that > > will provide the functionality against a synchronous DBD. > > best to start talking again once you've got something working. understood > Drivers are, as always, free to add support for anything they like > using the various driver-specific mechanisms provided by the DBI. > > For now I'd like to shelve this thread. Thanks to all who contributed. > > I'll return to it once I get to address the issue for DBI v2, or > a driver author brings it up because they're actually working on it > (or have a patch contributed by someone who has). > > Tim.
