On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 05:29:25AM -0500, Alan DeKok wrote:

>   I guess I'm confused when I remember an email from the freetds
> library developers, who told this list that the rlm_sql_freetds module
> was using an unsupported API for freetds, and wouldn't build or link
> to the freetds library.

He's right that the README is pretty useless about communicating this.
It says the module 'may not build', but fails to provide a pointer to
rlm_sql_sybase, the module which is written to a stable API (one defined
by other vendors).  I'll commit a comment to CVS to this effect.

Given that even the most studious documentation reader is going to waste
more time than is warranted looking at rlm_sql_freetds simply on the
grounds that the name coincides with the name of the SQL libraries
they're using (FreeTDS), I'd just as soon see this module removed
altogether or moved to a different CVS module.  The libtds that
rlm_sql_freetds uses not only has an unstable interface, it provides
almost NOTHING in the way of protocol abstraction -- maintaining
rlm_sql_freetds is not worth it, IMHO, because code may have to be added
for every new variant of the TDS protocol that needs to be supported (and
there are four in common use today -- two MS-specific versions, one
Sybase-specific specific version, and one "backwards-compatibility"
version common to both).

libtds provides a useful common library on top of which to implement the
standard API providers (CT-Lib, DB-Lib, ODBC) within FreeTDS, but I
really don't like to see public code using this lib outside of FreeTDS
itself.

-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: msg13969/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to