On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 09:46:43AM +0700, Ben Ford wrote: > Hi Brian, > Just a quick question from me regarding your comment about supporting > multiple databases... I've had a quick look through your patch and it > seems to cover a lot of the ground that the multi-db has already > changed. > * I was wondering if you're familiar at all with mulitple-db branch > yet? (You sent me an email about getting the patch for it a little > while ago, and just wondered if you'd looked at the existing code).
Familiar (walked the 4188 last integration merge up), although I'm still waiting on you to post the svk/branch publically ;) > * If you are do you have any idea how much your patch will impact the > existing work? Multidb crap is reliant on work of this sort; encapsulating the connection basically, so that mdb can handle N dbs. > * How do you see supporting multiple databases progressing? MDB layers over what I'm working on; mdb's connection global implementation (namely attempting to still rely on the global), specifically the attempt to collapse the msic backend bits down isn't clean at all imo. > I've been really busy lately, but if you think it might help, I can > update the branch with the latest changes from trunk and either fire > you a patch or try and get the mirrored SVK repo somewhere public... > Cheers, Updating it would be useful; I went digging on sunday before doing this, but what mdb has for the backend cleanup, still needs the same cleanup I'm doing. ~harring
pgpjvAkBCepoJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
