Jyri Virkki wrote:
> Jan S Berg wrote:
>> Yes, Connector/ODBC will also be in 64 bit. No difference for the 
>> Connector/J since it's all Java.
> 
> I know, feedback was just to make a note in the doc so it's precisely
> specified.
> 
>> ok, will add the files for Connector/J and Connector/ODBC, for the 64bit 
>> it will be the same
>> files as delivered by the 32bit case, so I guess that does not need to 
>> be repeated?
> 
> I'd list them in an Appendix just for the sake of completeness.

ok, will update with an Appendix.

> 
>>> What's the name of the new property? List it in the exported interface
>>> table as well.
>>  
>> We are proposing to call it "arch", but if there is a standard way of 
>> naming this
>> we would like to use that, although haven't found any.
> 
> I saw the reference later in the thread to Apache's
> "httpd/enable_64bit" boolean property so that's one precedent to
> follow. I'm not a huge fan of that naming, but still, better to follow
> a convention so that all components behave the same way.

Agree

> 
>>> Is 64bit overwhelmingly always the better choice when running on a
>>> 64bit platform?  (Enough so that it should be the default?)
>>>  
>> I have not been running that much performance testing with MySQL 32 vs 
>> 64, but from experience
>> with other databases it is not always the best choice. It was pointed 
>> out by Peter in this thread that
>> 64bit version on x86 was mostly the better choice.
>> There is no good way of predicting which should be default.
> 
> I saw the later discussion on 32bit being the default, so please just
> update the doc to reflect that.
> 
>>> That doesn't sound right? There's new things here which need
>>> documentation.  The man page(s) need to be updated to cover the 64bit
>>> support (and smf property). Presumably the ODBC & JDBC connectors have
>>> some sort of documentation as well?
>>  
>> Yes, sorry, should be adding doc for JDBC and ODBC Connectors as well as 
>> how to setup 64bit.
> 
> Ok just mention it in that section.
> 
> 
> 
>>> Or is SUNWmysql35o tightly coupled with MySQL5? What are the package
>>> dependencies?
>>  
>> Not tightly coupled with MySQL5, but are depending on the unixODBC 
>> driver manager package, as stated in the interface section.
> 
> But where on the filesystem does SUNWmysql35o deliver its content
> (this is why it's useful to have some listing or Appendix showing
> what each package delivers)?

It will be listed under the 5.0 release, but to use the Connector/ODBC
you will specify how to connect to the server using 
odbc.ini/odbcinst.ini files and should not be depending on which version 
you are running.

> 
> In some future Indiana release, will it 'just work' if I do 
> "pkg install SUNWmysql6 SUNWmysql35o"?

I cannot say what MySQL is planning to support here, but I would think
that they are planning supporting it at least for the next release.

Jan S

> 
> 
> 
>> And I think it is better to remove Java, and state that the driver 
>> implements
>> JSR 221 (JDBC version 4), which is more correct. It is also what is done
>> for other JDBC drivers (PostgreSQL and JavaDB), they don't refer to Java 
>> ARC cases.
>> Is that ok?
> 
> Seems ok to me.
> 
> 


Reply via email to