Geoff Hutchison writes:
>
> I don't want to go down the road of *depending* on a SQL database. Right
> now the Database code is still abstracted enough that the Mac port by
> Tenon systems is still using the GDBM database. If I had my kicks, it
> would check up on a variety of databases in the configure script and use
> whatever was installed. This is along the lines of the Perl DBI code,
> but would ultimately make a lot of people happy, even if it was limited
> to a set of databases (e.g. GDBM?, Berkeley, mySQL, mSQL, ...)
>
Agree 100%. I asked Tim Bunce a few days ago if it would be efficent
to embed the DBI code + DBD drivers in a C application. Unfortunately
some DBD drivers run perl code for every 'prepare' on a SQL order. But
I still think that's a great idea and some DBD drivers could be modified
for efficiency in this context. We could do the following:
. Link the application with dynamic library perl
. When establishing/closing a connection to a database run DBI->connect
and let it pick the right database.
. For each SQL order call C version of DBI functions so that no perl
code gets evaled (and this is where the DBD driver must be carefully
tuned).
If we can achieve this, we have an overhead a connection time only
and benefit of the genericity brought by DBI.
--
Loic Dachary
ECILA
100 av. du Gal Leclerc
93500 Pantin - France
Tel: 33 1 56 96 09 80, Fax: 33 1 56 96 09 61
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL: http://www.senga.org/
------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the htdig3-dev mailing list, send a message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the single word "unsubscribe" in
the SUBJECT of the message.
