According to this thread, SQLite is "System.Data.SQLite" http://sqlite.phxsoftware.com/forums/t/1886.aspx
I haven't tested it myself. FYI - It's installed, but didn't create an entry in machine.config. On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 2:28 AM, Frans Bouma <fr...@sd.nl> wrote: > > Just posted here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3481050/invariant- > > names-for-different-ado-net-providers > > < > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3481050/invariant-names-for-different- > > ado-net-providers> We'll probably have most of them by tomorrow. > > > > Informix is "IBM.Data.Informix", PostgreSQL is "Npgsql" > > > * Adaptive Server Anywhere: "iAnywhere.Data.SQLAnywhere" > * DB2: "IBM.Data.DB2" > * Firebird: "FirebirdSql.Data.FirebirdClient" > * Ingres: (don't know) > * MySQL: "MySql.Data.MySqlClient" > * Oracle: ODP.NET: "Oracle.DataAccess.Client" > * Oracle: MS Oracle: "System.Data.OracleClient" > * SQLite: (don't know) > * SQL CE: v3.0: "System.Data.SqlServerCe". > * SQL CE: v3.5: "System.Data.SqlServerCe.3.5". > * Sybase ASE: "Sybase.Data.AseClient" > > FB > > > > > > > Diego > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 18:44, Fabio Maulo <fabioma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Congratulation to both... you are closer... > > Now I would see the list of InvariantName... a little list nothing > > more > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Diego Mijelshon > > <di...@mijelshon.com.ar> wrote: > > > > > > My idea was actually to have an overload with the > providerName > > IN ADDITION TO driver/connType/cmdType. That way, if the assembly is > found, > > we use it. Otherwise, we fall back to the providerName. > > The advantage is that users relying on the current > resolution > > logic won't notice any changes. > > > > Diego > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 18:22, Pablo Ruiz > > <pablo.r...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Forgetting about 'ConfigurableDriver'.. I think we > can > > simple modify 'ReflectionBasedDriver' to add two constructors overloads, > one > > which allows passing a providerName and another one which allows passing > a > > providerName and the same three arguments it allows now (assembly, > > connection class and command class). > > > > This way, it will be a matter of each Driver using > one > > of the three ctors to specify which methods are supported by this driver. > > > > However, I see at least, one property to make > drivers > > supporting both methods, favor DbProviderFactory instead of Reflection > (of > > course for compatibility reasons, the default method would be > Reflection). > > This way users can switch over to DbProviderFactory just by setting some > > property like 'adonet_dbprovider=true'.. > > > > Comments? > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 9:40 PM, Fabio Maulo > > <fabioma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > I would see the list of InvariantName. > > Have you the list of InvariantName used by > your > > preferred RDBMS ? > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Diego > Mijelshon > > <di...@mijelshon.com.ar> wrote: > > > > > > We can crowdsource that... > > > > Let's see which drivers are > currently > > reflection-based: > > Adaptive Server Anywhere > > DB2 > > Firebird (two versions of this?) > > Informix > > Ingres > > MySQL > > PostgreSQL > > Oracle > > SQLite > > SQL CE > > Sybase > > > > > > In any case, we can have and > overload in > > ReflectionBasedDriver that takes a providerName. If that overload is not > > used, nothing changes. That will allow us to port the drivers one by one > > without breaking existing stuff. > > > > Diego > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 16:05, > Fabio > > Maulo <fabioma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > You can check the existence > of a > > DLL even without use reflexion. > > Then we can use the > InvariantName. > > Can you provide > InvariantName for > > all RDBMS supported by NH ? > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at > 3:53 > PM, > > Diego Mijelshon <di...@mijelshon.com.ar> wrote: > > > > > > You can't have your > cake and > > eat it too. > > We can either make > the > > existing drivers inherit from DbProviderDriver where it makes sense > (must- > > install providers, mostly), or have a new set of drivers. > > ...or we can use a > fallback > > logic that tries reflection first and, if unsuccessful, goes to DPF. > > > > Diego > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 13, > 2010 > at > > 15:27, Fabio Maulo <fabioma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > That > solution is the > > solution of Microsoft and give you the ability to work with multiple > > versions of the same assembly installed in the GAC. > > The usage > of > > DbProvider is not a problem but shouldn't be so complicated as proposed. > It > > should be completely transparent; the NH users should have 0 changes to > work > > with or without DbProvider. > > > > > > On Fri, Aug > 13, 2010 > > at 3:22 PM, Diego Mijelshon <di...@mijelshon.com.ar> wrote: > > > > > > I > see... I > > didn't know that. > > > However, > > there's a problem with that solution: I lose version independency. > > > That > problem > > is fixed by the DbProviderDriver without introducing any problems that I > can > > think of. > > > > > Diego > > > > > > > > On > Fri, Aug > > 13, 2010 at 14:23, Fabio Maulo <fabioma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > You > > don't have to. > > > In our > > tests you can see how redirect a partial assembly-name. > > > > > > > On Fri, > > Aug 13, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Diego Mijelshon <di...@mijelshon.com.ar> > wrote: > > > > > > > > This is a great patch, we currently have to copy > > IBM.Data.Informix.dll everywhere. > > > > > > > > I can create the DPF-based Informix driver if this gets included. > > > > > > Diego > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 11:41, Pablo Ruiz <pablo.r...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > By reading the details at http://216.121.112.228/browse/NH-1378 > looks > > like this was an old request (1.2.1 days) which has been considered > already. > > How ever (surelly due to time constraints ;)) this is still an open > issue, > > which may be considered now for NH3. > > > > > > I have a couple of classes implementing a base driver using > > DbProviderFactory, and I have attached them to the jira issue, so anyone > can > > review them... This one are copied from my own project, but they are > simple > > enought to get an starting point from which a discussion can be started. > > > > > > The point behind this issue (for me) it's mainly mono > compatibility, > > as mono does not implement 'BindingRedirect' support, and as such, the > only > > way of making NH work it's by placing the ado.net provider's assembly at > bin > > folder, which in some deployments it's far from perfect. > > > > > > As such, if having alternate driver implementations using > Reflection > > (current one) and DbProviderFactory (the alternate one) looks great for > > Fabio & co, I can provide fully-functional patches against trunk, just > letme > > know about it.. ;) > > > > > > Saludos. > > > > Att. Pablo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Fabio > > Maulo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Fabio Maulo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Fabio Maulo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Fabio Maulo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Fabio Maulo > > > > > > > > >
