On Tue, 09 Jun 2015 11:41:37 -0700 Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 6/9/15 10:44 AM, Daniel Kozak via Digitalmars-d wrote: > > > > On Tue, 09 Jun 2015 10:05:24 -0700 > > Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> For database connectivity I'm thinking of using ODBC. What I see is that > >> on all major platforms, vendors offer mature, good quality ODBC drivers, > >> and most programs that have anything to do with databases offer ODBC > >> connectivity. So connecting with ODBC means the individual database > >> drivers are already there; no need to waste effort on creating drivers > >> for each (or asking vendors to, which we can't afford). > > > > Having ODBC support in D is definitely important for some kind of > > applications. But for most applications which works with some (kind of) > > database it does not scale. We really need individual drivers for each of > > the most popular databases (even as a C/C++ lib with d binding around it). > > I derive the exact opposite conclusion from the same facts. > > * Individual drivers for each database engine: spend effort on designing > an API, THEN spend effort on writing or adapting (and then maintaining) > one driver per database engine. That has "does not scale" written all > over it. > > * ODBC: design an API on top of ODBC, then ENJOY all the hard work > various database engines have put into their drivers. That scales. > > > Andrei Yep this is the other side of a coin :), and I agree with that. But I do not belive that performance and features would be on same level as individual connectors.
