Ron,

Thanks for the reply!

That sounds pretty handy, so I'll give it a try. Another  
consideration is that I am currently using Squeak 3.4. However, there  
is no need to use that per se, so if you have any recommendations as  
to which image version you think would be the best, I'm curious about  
that as well.  No big reason to use 3.4 (as I do with my PDA/tablet  
work), I just have some images handy so I started working with that.

OK, the following is long, but I describe it because I'm trying to  
find a way to take what is in the database and make objects out of  
it. I figured I would have to write up my own ORM setup, but I don't  
think that will be too hard. I hadn't thought of using Glorp, or  
something like it, and if what I describe below could be used with  
Glorp, please let me know!

I won't be using Glorp, unfortunately.  I assume that I can't use it  
with our database schema. That said, I really don't know that much  
about Glorp or similar systems, and I certainly wouldn't mind a  
little input on this either.  The system I work on has this structure  
I've never used- sort of a simulated OODB.  I imagine that this  
database design has been used before but it's the first time I've  
seen it. In short:

TABLE RELATIONSHIP:
id: integer = Unique ID for this row.
compositeid: integer = The ID of the object pointing to the object  
represented in the row.
componentid: integer= The ID of the object represented in the row.
ikeywords: short string = The type/class of the item represented in  
the row.

TABLE VALUE:
id: integer = For certain ikeywords, the componentid of a row is here.
value: string = The associated string value.

Basically, the RELATIONSHIP table is nothing but pointers, along with  
the type/class information so our software knows what to do with it.  
It's pretty cool actually- it's a ton more flexible than most  
systems, it allows us to change our data model just like if we had an  
OODB.  For instance, if we added a "nickname" field to our "person"  
object, we don't have to touch the database schema. As an example,  
this is what would be in the two tables to create a simple person:

RELATIONSHIP:
id		compositeid	componentid	ikeywords
--------	---------------	----------------	----------------
99000	20000		30001		toperson [1]
99001	30001		30002		firstname
99002	30001		30003		lastname
99003	30001		30004		homenumber
99004	30004		30005		areacode
99005	30004		30006		phonenumber

VALUE:
id		value
--------	-------------
30002	"Aaron"
30003	"Reichow"
30005	"612"
30006	"555-1212"

Which could easily convert to a hash or object like so, all s-expy:

(Person (Firstname, Lastname, Homenumber (AreaCode, PhoneNumber))))

[1] The root of our tree is 20000, so when you compositeid= 20000,  
you've connected the row/object to the root.

Anyway, just in case anyone is bored and wondering about such things! :D

Regards,
Aaron

On Apr 18, 2007, at 7:19 PM, Ron Teitelbaum wrote:

> Hi Aaron,
>
> I'm using the second one.  The PostgreV2.  I did have to fix something
> http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=3834 to use it with Glorp.  If  
> you are
> looking for simple and you don't mind throwing your own SQL it  
> couldn't be
> easier.  All you do is connect and then send aConn execute:  
> aSQLStatement.
> If you do use Glorp then it does all the mapping for you.
>
> You do need to load MD5 from the cryptography package.  See
> www.squeaksource.com/Cryptography.html .
>
> Ron Teitelbaum
> Squeak Cryptography Team Leader
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: squeak-dev-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org [mailto:squeak- 
>> dev-
>> bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org] On Behalf Of Aaron Reichow
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 7:50 PM
>> To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list
>> Subject: Which PostgreSQL client?
>>
>> Hola!
>>
>> Just curious- what PostgreSQL client do you folks here on the list
>> recommend?  There seem to be two implementations:
>>
>>
>> http://www.io.com/~jimm/projects/squeak_postgresql/
>>
>> and
>>
>> http://ca.geocities.com/zazu@rogers.com/pgsqueak/
>> (though a newer version is on SM here: http://map.squeak.org/package/
>> a8d3ca99-f5f4-45e0-9aa7-100a77b64f45/autoversion/3)
>>
>> Any thoughts on which might be better?
>>
>> I'm going to use it for writing reports, drawing from info we have in
>> a PG db. I had to write a couple in Python, but I've gotten the go
>> ahead to do my new ones in Squeak.  I've been using the pg module for
>> Python, and for writing reports I appreciate the simplicity, compared
>> to the full-blown PyGreSQL package.  I'm not using this for a web app
>> or anything too hardcore- my co-worker or I run them periodically.
>>
>> I mention how I'll be using it because the usual considerations for a
>> decision like this- speed, SSL support, etc- take a back-seat to how
>> easy to use the API is.
>>
>> Thanks in advance!
>>
>> Regards,
>> Aaron
>>
>
>
>