On Monday, 8 October 2012 at 07:35:13 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
On Sunday, 7 October 2012 at 20:05:22 UTC, denizzzka wrote:
On Sunday, 7 October 2012 at 17:06:31 UTC, Joseph Rushton
Wakeling wrote:
On 10/07/2012 10:55 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
Why only PostgreSQL. Shouldn't it also work with MySQL,
Oracle, DB2,
PervasiveSQL, SQLite3, etc.?
I don't have sufficient experience with SQL to be able to
really make a judgement here, but is there a case for a
std.sql or std.db that would provide a uniform D interface to
the arbitrary DB of choice?
Each database engine has a unique distinguishing features that
make this engine interesting. (for example, different
implementations of transactions - SQL standard does not
describe the SQL transactions precisely enough)
There are plenty of existing interfaces to base D's design on,
just a few of them:
Perl - DBI
Python - DB API
C, C++ - ODBC (there is an UNIX variant of it)
C++ - OLE DB (Although Windows specific)
Java - JDBC
.NET - Data Providers
Ruby - DBI
TCL - TDBC
Go - database package
Delphi - Data Access
Haskell - HaskellDB (HDBC)
So, I do not know is it possible to make a universal
interface. And why it may need in real life?
At least in the enterprise world, we tend to write applications
in a DB independent way.
One reason is to be able to deploy the applications without
forcing the customers to invest in new DB engines, thus
reaching a broader client base.
Sometimes inside the same organization different business units
have different DB engines running (even different versions of
the same DB).
Finally, to minimize costs when management decides for whatever
reason, to change the DB licenses being used.
--
Paulo
For this to work you need to implement an independent way to
create queries that would work on all database engines the same
way. I believe that this problem is in principle much more
complicated than it would have been implemented interfaces to
databases in separate libs.
