> On Mon, 11 Apr 2005, Rob Kinyon wrote: > > > C::DBI is too slow. (I had to search million++ row tables with > > multiple joins and return back in under 2 seconds on a low-midsize > > machine.) > > > > SQL::Routine / Rosetta (they're linked) are just waaaay too > > complicated. The learning curve is so steep that it was easier for me > > to roll my own than to understand their stuff. > > > > Tangram is a OO-inheritance-to-relational mapper (which is dumb to > > apply to the relational world, but that's another topic). > > > > I tried to get my code into C::DBI, to facilitate multi-table joins > > (which it doesn't do very well right now), but was put off by the > > complexity of C::DBI (which I've never used past sandbox). > > Did you look at Alzabo at all? I think it does a much better job than > C::DBI of handling the generation of complex queries programmatically. > It's less complex than Rosetta, from what I can tell, but moreso than > C::DBI. And it's not an OO-RDBMS type of tool at all, even less so than > C::DBI. > > -dave
I've spent about an hour going through the Alzabo docs and I'm about 20% done and haven't even downloaded it. It looks amazingly powerful and I think it solves the problem Adam, Curtis, and I each independently solved, but in a different way. The only problem I see with Alzabo (and CDBI and similar tools) is that you have to design your project with it in mind. Converting an existing codebase to Alzabo or CDBI is going to be impossible without a complete rewrite. Now, this isn't an objection to Alzabo specifically - Class::MakeMethods and similar tools are the same way. I just don't have that many new projects where I can really play with it that I wouldn't use DBM::Deep for. :-) _______________________________________________ sw-design mailing list [email protected] http://metaperl.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sw-design
