Hello,

Markus Fischer wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2001 at 08:07:17PM -0200, Manuel Lemos wrote :
> > [...]   lication. I don't think PEAR-DB provides this. [...]
> 
> For me, Metabase and PEAR::DB (and others)  were exactly written
> for that purpose: driver independent database access. Did I miss
> something?
> 
> Or do you just want to say that Metabase abstraction is more
> complete than compared to PEAR::DB?

That's obvious, Metabase was started much sooner and so it is much more
mature, but that is not my point.

My point is that PEAR-DB just treats every DBMS data type as text. For
instance, dates can be represented as text, but each DBMS represents
dates in different formats. If applications that use PEAR-DB want to
handle date field values, they need to know how each of the different
underlying DBMS formats dates. Applications become an headache to
maintain if you want to keep portability.

With Metabase, applications do not have to carry that burden because
Metabase performs the necessary conversions with all the data that goes
in and out the DBMS, not only for date fields, but for a large set of
data types. This is true portability. Compared to Metabase, only JDBC
does a similar job. Like with Java, Metabase database applications are
write once and run everywhere supported.

Regards,
Manuel Lemos

-- 
PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to