On 07-10-2011 16:11, Steve Teale wrote:
I'm thinking that for each database that gets covered there will
need to be two modules, like:
etc.c.mysql
etc.mysqld
The etc.c.xxx modules would be completely different between databases -
just translations of the necessary header files. The xxxd modules
would be as similar as possible consistent with allowing the strong
points of individual database systems to show through, and the weak
points of others to be avoided. I don't think all should be reduced
to some LCD.
These modules should attempt to make a good range of capabilities
available to the D programmer, but they not have to be all encompassing.
Those users who want to do really fancy things can drop back to the
low-level interface. They should probably have the following capabilities:
1) Establishing and closing database connections.
2) The capability to execute literal SQL statements - execSQL()
if you like. Some of these will generate result sets, of which more below.
3) The capability to create prepared statements with in and out
parameters and association of the parameters with a source, and
then to execute these. This breaks down into several components/
capabilities, which could be labeled:
3a) createPreparedStatement() - marshal parameters, associate them
with a sourceand have the server prepare the statement.
3b) execStatement() - for those SQL statements that don't have a
result set.
3c) execStatementIncremental()/getNext() - execute the prepared statement,
then fetch the result rows one at a time into some kind of result set.
3d) execStatementAll() - execute the prepared statement and get all
the resulting rows into some kind of result set.
3e) (maybe) execScalar() - do the whole sequence prepare, execute,
and get a single value result set placed into a D variable.
3f) (maybe) execStoredProcedure() - another 'do the whole thing'
capability TBD.
It is when we come to the nature of the result sets that there is
likely to be dissent. I favor arrays of structs, but we should
probably do arrays of arrays of variants too for those situations
where structures can't be sorted out at compile time. There needs
to be some symmetry between what is used here, and what can be used
as input to operations such as a prepared insert. It is of course
vital that this part of each middle layer produce exactly the same
kind of results. Otherwise the top layer could become difficult.
On top of this set of two modules for each database, I envisage a
higher-level module - etc.dbops - that provides a bunch of convenience
templates for various common database operations, spanning the databases.
Once the middle layer is in place, this top layer should be relatively
easy to implement. It should be noted though that all these database
wrappers will be monstrously difficult to test.
I am at the point with MySQL where I can get the result of a plain
old query into an array of a checked structure type. I have the
prepared statement stuff, and know how the result will be created from
a prepared query (the execStatementAll() case) - I just have to plow
through a bit more binding and fetching.
This is probably rather general and vague, but I would like to get
comments so we can iterate toward a practical design.
Thanks
Steve
Just a note on module naming: mysqld is misleading - it could mean
"mysql daemon". I would recommend just calling it mysql and calling the
C interface etc.c.mysqlc or something like this.
- Alex
