On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 7:08 PM, Javier Guerra Giraldez <jav...@guerrag.com>wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 1:01 PM, Petite Abeille <petite.abei...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > This is where we diverge, as in my opinion there is no need for any > specialize API to achieve that goal if one could simply query > information_schema directly, across different databases. > > there's no need for any new layer if you want to access directly, and > deal with engine diferences. > > another layer that presents common info in a common API (list of > tables in the DB, list of fields in a table, etc), would be valuable > for some applications, and definitely not the job for the lower-lever > layer. > Well, we are all vehemently agreeing that the low-level API needs to be simple, clean and unencumbered by any preconceptions about its use (other than the developer wants fast, unhindered access to the data at the other end of the wire). We disagree about whether optionally to layer anything higher level on top beyond that. I am intrigued by various possibilities, but myself not sold they all (or even any of them) belong in LuaSQL per se. First priorities are getting new versions of all the drivers working on the latest respective driver APIs, and adding some new drivers, and improving the installation/build process (such that it is easy to add new drivers and extend existing ones). - Bob > -- > Javier > > _______________________________________________ > Kepler-Project mailing list > Kepler-Project@lists.luaforge.net > http://lists.luaforge.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kepler-project > http://www.keplerproject.org/ > -- Bob Calco DBA Softcraft Solutions bob.ca...@softcraft-solutions.com
_______________________________________________ Kepler-Project mailing list Kepler-Project@lists.luaforge.net http://lists.luaforge.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kepler-project http://www.keplerproject.org/
