Marc Britten writes:
> next question is how to deal with backwards compat? should there be two
> sets of the DB calls in the source with and IFDEF around them? or two
> sets of files, the right one gets moved into place during ./configure?
IMHO, backward compatibility should be achieved thru a program that converts
old Berkeley DB files into SQL database. Trying to have a program able to
handle both will lead to *very* hairy code.
> already have plans to do a DB abstraction layer, does anyone thing that
> the current berkely stuff could be made compatible? i'm afraid I don't
> know much about their stuff
No, the semantic is too different. In fact you could easily emulate
Berkeley DB behaviour with SQL database. But that's not why you want a SQL
database. You want to benefit from its versatility and ease of use. The
nightmare will be to continue Berkeley DB compatibility while adding
functionalities using SQL facilities. How do you emulate
select * from table where value < 20 and string like "%foo" with Berkeley DB ?
Surely you can, but at the expense of many lines of code.
Beware : this opinion is solely mine and may not reflect the opinion of the
Ht://Dig group in general. This subject is highly controversial :-)
Cheers,
--
Loic Dachary
24 av Secretan
75019 Paris
Tel: 33 1 42 45 09 16
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
URL: http://www.senga.org/
------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the htdig3-dev mailing list, send a message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
You will receive a message to confirm this.
