-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 15:26:36 +0100 Jan Pazdziora <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 09:17:39AM -0500, Jeff Ortel wrote: > > > > Whether this is done via 1) compatibility layer or 2) migrating > > the queries to ANSI SQL or both is another question. The advantage > > of doing it in the compatibility layer is (maybe) lower risk when > > running on Oracle. But, since we know there are many queries that > > must be rewritten (for example: queries with the oracle (+) syntax > > for outer joins) anyway, why not just do the right thing now and > > get it over with while we're committed to spending the $$ and time > > to do this? If satellite is going to become a multi-database > > application, shouldn't the application code be as database agnostic > > as possible? > > Agreed with the intention. But why is this part of the PostgreSQL > effort. Shouldn't this be completely independent goal, with its own > requirements and plan and test plan? I don't see why it should be separated in the first place but if it were, it should probably be done before the PostgreSQL effort (otherwise there'd be some wasted effort involved) implying that we (a) need to put that on hold and (b) find people to do it. We've already got people with a strong background in both databases and are already prepping for a big test/QA impact, I say hit it while we're in there. Devan - -- Devan Goodwin <[email protected]> Software Engineer Spacewalk / RHN Satellite Halifax, Canada 650.567.9039x79267 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkmDE70ACgkQAyHWaPV9my4PfgCfWuasLd86THFxPiakQleGiWNr gUYAoMLO18gxJQHrOgKEvVLl6pbjUw0a =q/aK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Spacewalk-devel mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
