On Fri, 2004-03-05 at 09:59 -0600, Linas Vepstas wrote: > On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 07:00:10PM +0100, Rodrigo Moya was heard to remark: > > On Thu, 2004-03-04 at 11:11 -0600, Linas Vepstas wrote: > > > > > > The API that we use for database acesss is "QOF". > > > > > yes, but then, QOF, what does it use to directly access the DB? native > > postgres/mysql libraries? odbc? > > Yes. The xml data access is through a stack-based progressive scanner > build on top of libxml. Its overkill for out needs, it was > really meant for xml-rpc-like parsing which is how we were going > to make QOF be network-distributed. > so, your database is a XML file then?
> We don't support mysql because mysql doesn't have the features > that we need. > > ODBC was designed by a moron who doesn't know C programming. > ODBC is a great example of how not to design an API. > great, at least one thing we agree on :-) > libdbi.sourceforge.net is great for low-level bits-n-bytes access > to sql db's. Its easy-to-use, small, fast, well-designed. > A great example of how to design a low-level API correctly. > > If libgda is using native postgres/mysql api's for its server > providers, you might want to look at using libdbi if you haven't > done so. It does everything the native libpg does, and it has > drivers for other sql db's too. I dunno, I have not really used > libdbi extensively yet, it may have faults I haven't discovered. > libdbi does what libgda does, so there's no point in using one from the other. cheers _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gnucash.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
