On Feb 25, 2011, at 10:35 PM, LegacyUSA wrote:
My goal is to develop a small prototype using ruby: I want to
program as
little as possible in whatever database linguo the database uses.
In that case, I would just use the SQLite that you get for free when
you start any Rails project without specifying a database engine.
That's going to be completely fine for any demo, I've even deployed
with it for very low-volume sites.
To be clear, Rails does not require you to be database-specific unless
you get out into the weeds of a project -- one that's "off the rails"
by definition. You will specify the structure of your database using
migrations, written in Ruby, and you'll be using those to talk
(through the database adapter du jour) to your actual database engine.
You're always working at least one level of abstraction away from the
actual database engine in any case, because the adapters mediate
requests (except for find_by_sql) and work around differences in
primary key structures etc.
As far as I know, Filemaker can talk to SQL databases, and can do some
import-y things in the reverse direction, but it's not specifically
SQL inside. It has its own language and storage engine, unrelated to
SQL, and can't be interrogated through SQL. This last part is from
memory, I have not looked at the specs in at least a couple of years.
Walter
--
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.
