On 03/20/2010 07:50 AM, Michael A. Peters wrote:
Nilesh Govindarajan wrote:
On 03/20/2010 02:31 AM, Michael A. Peters wrote:
Mattias Thorslund wrote:
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
(just a warning -- as a relative newbie to PHP, i'll probably have
the occasional dumb question. just humour me.)
i'm looking at some existing PHP code that accesses a mysql 5.0 db,
and it's coded using the mysql-specific calls: mysql_connect,
mysql_select_db, etc, etc.
is there any reason i *wouldn't* want to rewrite that code using the
more general PEAR DB module, and use mysqli? certainly, as i read it,
using the PEAR DB module would make it easier down the road if i
suddenly decide to change the DB backend.
anyway, any compelling arguments for or against?
rday
--
Well, the reason you shouldn't use PEAR DB in a new project is that
it's being deprecated. MDB2 is the PEAR successor, and does provide
emulation for some features that don't exist on all database
platforms, such as LastInsertID. It can also help you convert your
database from one platform to another, since it also provides methods
for detecting and managing the database structure itself (the Manager
and Reverse modules).
That said, if I were to start a new project at this time, I would look
closer at whether PDO fits my needs.
I use MDB2.
I hear PDO hyped a lot, what does it really give me that MDB2 does not,
other than making the application dependent upon a binary module?
binary module makes a lot of difference. If you use MDB2, the
interpreter has to compile MDB2's code along with your program logic.
Whereas PDO is already compiled one, so it will do the job much much
faster.
So since I already cash my db requests via APC the benefits to me would
be small.
Yeah the use of APC or Xcache, etc. would not make any difference
between PDO and MDB2 in terms of performance.
--
Nilesh Govindarajan
Site & Server Administrator
www.itech7.com
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
