On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 02:44:40AM +0200, Hilko Bengen wrote: > Matthew Palmer <mpalmer@debian.org> writes: > >> With ODBC in mind, I don't think we should waste time abstracting > >> for other DBMSs for the moment. > > > > I don't think it's worth it at all. I'd say the majority of webapps > > / other database-liking things don't work with multiple DBMS' > > anyway. > > Since you're putting effort into abstracting locel / remote databases > already, giving users the opportunity to work with other systems than > just MySQL isn't that much extra work. > > I am maintaining a package of drupal, a CMS written in PHP that offers > support for MySQL and PostgreSQL (it used to support MSSQL, too) and > it wouldn't help my package if the web application policy strictly > depended on LAMP. Then you can code your package to use either of a PgSQL or a MySQL database. But the abstraction system still needs to know what sort of database it is, because there are plenty of webapps that will only work with one, and presenting a list of PgSQL databases to a webapp that will only work with a MySQL DB is unpleasant, to say the least. - Matt
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature