Very good. Just svn'd the code, so I'll get on with it.
RJL
On Wed, 2004-06-30 at 21:56, Ed Leafe wrote:
> On Jun 30, 2004, at 4:33 PM, Paul McNett wrote:
>
> >> OK, postgres has a number of python access methods, it might
> >> be worth splitting the access into a number of methods (we
> >> use pgdb): just an idea.
> >
> > What are the pros/cons of each one? IOW, why is it that there
> > are several dbapi libraries for postgres when one would
> > suffice?
>
> At PyCon DC 2004, there was pretty universal consensus that psycopg
> was the adapter of choice. Things mentioned were dbapi-2.0 compliance,
> speed, stability and support. Many of the adapters listed are no longer
> actively developed/supported.
>
> Here's an abstract from the PostgreSQL session that I went to at PyCon
> DC 2004:
> <http://www.sourcekeg.co.uk/www.python.org/pycon/dc2004/papers/23/>.
>
> > I had originally set up the dBackend stuff to handle any number
> > of backend libraries that could just be 'dropped in', but Ed
> > didn't like that and switched to friendly names such as 'mysql'
> > instead of 'MySQLdb' - IOW the name of the database instead of
> > the name of the dbapi library.
>
> The aim is to simplify. Developers should specify the backend, and
> Dabo should handle the connection. We should default to a single
> adapter per database. Those who are more adventurous can code their own
> backends. I don't see any benefit in developing and supporting a dozen
> Postgres adapters.
>
> Since our volunteer is a pgdb user, then that's what we'll use
> initially. Then if someone decides that some other adapter is better
> and wants to develop the backend file and show us why, then we could
> switch. But getting things to work in the first place is our main
> objective.
>
> ___/
> /
> __/
> /
> ____/
> Ed Leafe
> http://leafe.com/
> http://dabodev.com/
--
Robert Ladyman
Tel: +44 (0) 7732 771 649
http://www.file-away.co.uk
Sent to you via the Magach Wireless Network
http://www.file-away.co.uk/rlan.htm
©2004 Robert Ladyman |
