I agree Bob. This approach would probably be the best thing to do.
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
from: "Bob Silverberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 10:39:39 -0400
I too am interested in this project. I've been using SQL Server for most of
my sites and I generally use stored procedures for all of my database calls.
I'd like to see a system that can be used with any database, and can utilize
either inline SQL or stored procedures.
I believe that this isn't too difficult a task, if we define an interface to
the database. My suggestion would be that all SQL should sit in separate
files (e.g., qry files in Fusebox), and that the templates that call or
include those files would simply pass a standard set of variables to the
file, and would expect back a standard set of queries and/or return
variables. Then, those qry files could include inline SQL or calls to
stored procedures. If interested, different people can write these qry
files for specific databases, to utilize functions specific to those
databases and to optimize performance.
That way all of the pure CF functionality, including all of the UI, could be
written without any regard for the final database.
I'd be willing to write the interface for SQL server.
Thanks for starting this project and this list - I think it will be fun,
interesting and useful.
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: July 20, 2001 10:17 AM
To: CF-Talk
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: NEW: Open Source Was RE: Open source content management who wa
nts to join
I'm on the digest version of the list (a few too many emails for me to track
otherwise), so I get everyone's comments all at the same time. Because of
that, I'm not including any snippets from other messages -too many.
The new list for open source sounds great. I just signed up.
>>>>It's open now. www.houseoffusion.com or send a subscribe message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(ok, I did include a snippet)
I suggest we move the conversation over there (I posted both places)..
Regarding my recommendation for PostgreSQL, I've used both mySQL (which I
like) and it works great for small-medium size sites, but I've noticed that
it begins to have a few problems as the size gets big and some of the SQL
gets deeper. PostgreSQL (http://www.postgresql.org/) seems to be able to
handle the larger sites better. I haven't used it as much as mySQL, but
I've been impressed with it so far. But being that most of what people are
going to do is going to be small-medium in size, maybe mySQL would be the
better standard. I think the best direction would be what Thomas Chiverton
commented. "A portable system should run on all databases." That probably
means we optimize for one and include the SQL code for others to tweak.
Oh, and what a way to start the day - ".. little over a third of my
lifetime..." (Stephan's remark) - and I'm only 33, which according to my
kids is ancient. I guess it reflects the discussion with a co-worker (he's
done CF for 6 or 7 years - when it wasn't even a 1.0 version yet) when we
talked about using Commodore VIC-20's and how powerful they were. Sigh....
but at least I'm not as old as the coworker... :)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
