Hi,
Gene Sokolov wrote:
> it might be useful to consider an abstraction layer in 1.x
> for adding other databases as well.
Sounds nice. There "Broken Shinai" release (1.3) was the result of the
first serious attempt towards database independence. It uses ODBC as a
ready-made abstraction layer. The only problem was that the way Midgard
handles the queries and returned rows is very slow with ODBC. I believe
that this might be the issue also with other generic database
abstraction layers.
The "Broken Shinai" release didn't rewrite the SQL statements but
achieved database independence at the library level. Rewriting SQL
statements shouldn't be a big problem as all datatypes used by Midgard
can quite easily be mapped to generic INT, STRING, DATE, and TEXT types
that should be supported by all reasonable databases (Oracle port has a
problem with TEXT fields being too small). The SET fields used in many
tables can easily be converted to bitmaps stored in INT fields.
Jukka
--
This is The Midgard Project's mailing list. For more information,
please visit the project's web site at http://www.midgard-project.org
To unsubscribe the list, send an empty email message to address
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
