Brian Litke wrote:
>
> I vote for MySQL since it is free.
> (and since I use it) :-)
>
> Brian Litke
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >The move to DB2 is nice. But have you thought of moving ht://dig to an SQL
> >database?
> >
> >mSQL and MySQL come to mind ...
The problem with a sql database is that they do not lend themselves well to
the variable record length database approach that ht://Dig 3 uses.
This is one of the things that I want to change in ht://Dig 4 so that a(ny)
sql database can be used.
A sql database could possibly be attached to ht://Dig 3 but I forsee a huge
performance penalty for having to rely on blobs instead of normal table
fields. (Especially if the sql database is connected through a network...)
One thing that still bothers me about a sql database approach is how to
implement all the existing fuzzy search algorithms. sql "like" is a little
limited... sure, there are databases that have extensions, but then you're
not talking sql anymore and your are locked into one db, which I want to
prevent.
--
Andrew Scherpbier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Contigo Software <http://www.contigo.com/>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the htdig mailing list, send a message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the single word "unsubscribe" in
the body of the message.
