bnich...@ca.afilias.info (Brad Nicholson) writes:
Scott Marlowe wrote:
As with phrases like, the quickest way to grill a unicorn steak,
that it can be stated in a few words does not make in possible.
Exactly. The big issue here is that nobody's saying what kind of app
they want to write.
Sim Zacks wrote:
database agnostic code is theoretically a great idea. However, you lose
most of the advantages of the chosen database engine. For example, if
you support an engine that does not support relational integrity you
cannot use delete cascades.
The most efficient way is to have a
David Goodenough wrote:
I don't support anyone has written a how to write database agnostic
code guide? That way its not a matter of porting, more a matter of
starting off right.
There is no real way to write database[-]agnostic SQL, although of course
middleware code can and should be.
On Monday 21 June 2010, Lew wrote:
Sim Zacks wrote:
database agnostic code is theoretically a great idea. However, you
lose
most of the advantages of the chosen database engine. For
example, if
you support an engine that does not support relational integrity you
cannot use delete
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 08:35:02AM -0400, Lew wrote:
David Goodenough wrote:
I don't support anyone has written a how to write database
agnostic code guide? That way its not a matter of porting, more a
matter of starting off right.
There is no real way to write database[-]agnostic SQL,
pour le contenu fourni.
From: david.goodeno...@btconnect.com
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] A thought about other open source projects
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 16:14:10 +0100
On Monday 21 June 2010, Lew wrote:
Sim Zacks wrote:
database agnostic code
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 04:14:10PM +0100, David Goodenough wrote:
On Monday 21 June 2010, Lew wrote:
Sim Zacks wrote:
database agnostic code is theoretically a great idea. However, you
lose
most of the advantages of the chosen database engine. For
example, if
you support an engine
As with phrases like, the quickest way to grill a unicorn steak,
that it can be stated in a few words does not make in possible.
Exactly. The big issue here is that nobody's saying what kind of app
they want to write.
If it's a simple web content management system, the possibility of
having
Scott Marlowe wrote:
As with phrases like, the quickest way to grill a unicorn steak,
that it can be stated in a few words does not make in possible.
Exactly. The big issue here is that nobody's saying what kind of app
they want to write.
Or what sort of performance requirements are
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 01:55:36PM -0400, Brad Nicholson wrote:
Scott Marlowe wrote:
As with phrases like, the quickest way to grill a unicorn steak,
that it can be stated in a few words does not make in possible.
Exactly. The big issue here is that nobody's saying what kind of
app they
On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 11:27:20 -0700
David Fetter da...@fetter.org wrote:
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 01:55:36PM -0400, Brad Nicholson wrote:
Scott Marlowe wrote:
As with phrases like, the quickest way to grill a unicorn
steak, that it can be stated in a few words does not make in
possible.
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On lör, 2010-06-19 at 22:56 +0100, David Goodenough wrote:
These projects need help to realise that adding Postgresql is not a
big
job, especially for those using JDBC which can already connect to all
DBs. It strikes me that if the project
database agnostic code is theoretically a great idea. However, you lose
most of the advantages of the chosen database engine. For example, if
you support an engine that does not support relational integrity you
cannot use delete cascades.
The most efficient way is to have a separate backend module
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Sim Zacks wrote:
database agnostic code is theoretically a great idea. However, you lose
most of the advantages of the chosen database engine. For example, if
you support an engine that does not support relational integrity you
cannot use delete cascades.
The most
David Goodenough wrote on 20.06.2010 11:08:
I don't support anyone has written a how to write database agnostic
code guide? That way its not a matter of porting, more a matter of
starting off right.
I don't believe in database agnostic code.
In the end it basically means that the application
On Sun, 20 Jun 2010 12:52:22 +0200
Thomas Kellerer spam_ea...@gmx.net wrote:
David Goodenough wrote on 20.06.2010 11:08:
I don't support anyone has written a how to write database
agnostic code guide? That way its not a matter of porting,
more a matter of starting off right.
I don't
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 10:08:34AM +0100, David Goodenough wrote:
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On lör, 2010-06-19 at 22:56 +0100, David Goodenough wrote:
These projects need help to realise that adding Postgresql is
not a big job, especially for those using JDBC which
On Sunday 20 June 2010 12.52:22 Thomas Kellerer wrote:
I don't believe in database agnostic code.
Using a db abstraction may be the right way to write database agnostic
code.
I have quite a good impression of SQLAlchemy, for example: it is quite
generic, and it is still possible to write
On lör, 2010-06-19 at 22:56 +0100, David Goodenough wrote:
These projects need help to realise that adding Postgresql is not a
big
job, especially for those using JDBC which can already connect to all
DBs. It strikes me that if the project could write a few pages
gleaned
from other porting
19 matches
Mail list logo
