Bill Sim wrote: > This sounds ridiculous to me, but if I'm missing something, I would love > to hear some opinions. Is there an issue with support for Ruby+Postgres?
We use Postgres as the backend for everything we run, the sole exception is our webfax front end which I do not have time to figure out how to make work with Postgres. One day perhaps. The main thing to be aware of with contractors is that the dominant thinking about DBMS, insofar as web-app developers go, is that it is a conveniently formatted bit-bucket. This is very far from the truth but it is the current paradigm. ActiveRecord is but a case in point. ORMs frequently make it very difficult to exploit Postgres's capabilities to any great extent. There are plugins to accomplish a few additional things with Postgres through AR, but most of the features of a full-fledge RDBMS are all but inaccessible without a lot of SQL strings built into your application. If your requirements are at all sophisticated in terms of transaction volume and complexity then you may be better off looking for people who have worked with the sequel gem and who know Postgres inside out. Developers with deep knowledge of the DBMS and its inherent capabilities -- like triggers, functions and stored procedures -- will provide you with far better results than peole who just know web-apps and the minimum necessary to get data in and out of the store. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
