[Seaside] RDB access (was: Rolling with Ruby on Rails vs. Seaside)
milan.zimmermann at sympatico.ca
Sat Jan 29 22:56:36 CET 2005
On January 29, 2005 05:24 pm, Todd Blanchard wrote:
> I'm curious how did ruby get such good db coverage? Is it just using
Good Point .. I am sure someone here knows .. I checked
and it says:
MySQL, PostgreSQL, SQLite, SQL Server, and DB2 are supported out of the box.
Oracle and FrontBase drivers are in the works."
so it appears it is not ODBC.
Here http://api.rubyonrails.com/?u=ar.rubyonrails.com they say:
Active Record ships with adapters for MySQL/Ruby (compatible with
Ruby/MySQL), PostgreSQL, and SQLite (needs SQLite 2.8.13+ and SQLite-Ruby
1.1.2+). The adapters are around 100 lines of code fulfilling the interface
specified by ActiveRecord::ConnectionAdapters::AbstractAdapter. Writing a new
adapter should be a small task - especially considering the extensive test
suite that'll make sure you're fulfilling the contract.
So I'd guess some sort of wrappers around "native" interface to each database.
Which, for example for middle tier application against Oracle would mean, I
assume, installing something like SQL-net client in the middle-tier...
Just guesses, MIlan
> On Jan 29, 2005, at 12:05 PM, Milan Zimmermann wrote:
> > On January 29, 2005 05:19 am, danil a. osipchuk wrote:
> >>> I've not tried Glorp on Squeak, but IIUC it deals directly with
> >>> the PostgreSQL client. It would seem to be a simple matter [:)]
> >>> to agree on a common RDB access layer (now that there are connections
> >>> for MySQL and ODBC) and change Glorp to use it. We might even want
> >>> this layer to be portable across Smalltalks as well.
> >>> I may take this on (the common RDB layer, not tweaking Glorp),
> >>> since I may need to access some data on Sybase (I hope ODBC will
> >>> work for it).
> >>> --yanni
> >> I think what Squeak really lacks of - is proper ODBC client (not FFI
> >> one, with blocking, etc).
> > I agree, it seems essential for acceptance in the large business
> > (=money) to
> > have relational db-independent access API similar to JDBC (I guess
> > that's
> > what Yanni means by "common RDB layer"). The first implementation
> > would start
> > either through a "ODBC-bridge" or even "JDBC-bridge". I do not know
> > how the
> > Squeak ODBC access layer works now, but it would have to be proper
> > non-blocking implementation. Later implementations could be "pure
> > Squeak" or
> > better "pure Smalltalk" implementations similar to level-4 JDBC "pure
> > Java"
> > drivers.
> > Two comments regarding a "db-independent" relational database access
> > API and
> > initial implementation:
> > - The existence of JDBC literally saved Java's butt in the late90's
> > where it
> > managed to establish itself on the server when Microsoft blocked it
> > from the
> > client.
> > - In 2 of my Java contracts (for one company - software for
> > insurance,
> > medical insurance, banks. The other - software for medical practices)
> > the
> > ability to switch the application between relational databases is
> > absolutely
> > essential. Such big industries often tell you "we buy this software
> > only if
> > it runs on Oracle (or DB2 or SQL Server etc). With good JDBC drivers,
> > such
> > switch take virtually no time - change the URL, the driver class, and
> > off you
> > go, with a few differences when accessing BLOBs. So it seems such
> > layer would
> > bring Squeak to the next level of aceptance and allowed more people to
> > make
> > living of Squeak, but as usually, this is an chicken and egg problem
> > ...
> > (unless some big company such as HP does not sponsor such effort, that
> > would
> > be nice :) )
> > (I hope you do not take this as me advocating Java, just drawing
> > parallels, as
> > this started as discussion of Ruby Rail )
> > Thanks Milan
> >> It seems that squeak community is not strong
> >> enougth to build all variety of database clients right now (like it
> >> was
> >> done for VW). But just one ODBC client would be sufficient in most
> >> cases
> >> and also could play a role of common rdb layer (like in Dolphin).
> >> With a
> >> help of knowlegable people I can try to do it myself ( or may be
> >> somebody more experienced can). The questions are - should odbc client
> >> be implemeted natively or using plugins, and where can one get
> >> specification and docs on odbc protocol
> >> danil
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Seaside mailing list
> >> Seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> >> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/seaside
> > _______________________________________________
> > Seaside mailing list
> > Seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/seaside
> Seaside mailing list
> Seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
More information about the Seaside