[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

mysql ruby settup

Mer Gilmartin

8/28/2006 1:37:00 PM

To use mysql with a ruby application
is these modules at http://dev.mysql.com/downloads... all I need?

Also is there any good tutorials talking about using mysql with ruby?
Or setting up your first ruby mysql application.

Thank you for your time

--
Posted via http://www.ruby-....
7 Answers

Mer Gilmartin

8/28/2006 2:21:00 PM

0

Ok I thought for a bit I might need both modules, but I
think now I only need one.

I could do with someone who has already gone through these steps to give
a bit of advice though.

Which is better? Or which should you use for what?


--
Posted via http://www.ruby-....

David Vallner

8/28/2006 2:51:00 PM

0

Mer Gilmartin wrote:
> Ok I thought for a bit I might need both modules, but I
> think now I only need one.

You only need one.

> Which is better? Or which should you use for what?

Use the C binding I'd say. It'll be both faster, and the logic is
performed by the "original" MySQL interface library, and because of that
will probably be both more stable and complete.

Use the pure Ruby binding if you have to deploy on a platform where you
can't compile the extension, or where a binary gem isn't available.
(Which leaves only rare edge cases - shell accounts on shared *nix boxes
without GCC, or 64-bit Windowsen.)

David Vallner

Mer Gilmartin

8/28/2006 2:57:00 PM

0

David Vallner wrote:

> Use the C binding I'd say. It'll be both faster, and the logic is
> performed by the "original" MySQL interface library, and because of that
> will probably be both more stable and complete.
>
> Use the pure Ruby binding if you have to deploy on a platform where you
> can't compile the extension, or where a binary gem isn't available.
> (Which leaves only rare edge cases - shell accounts on shared *nix boxes
> without GCC, or 64-bit Windowsen.)
>
> David Vallner

Thanks. The C binding will work better then.

It shouldnt add an extra level of complexity when I try to make an .exe
file for an application will it?

--
Posted via http://www.ruby-....

David Vallner

8/28/2006 3:04:00 PM

0

Mer Gilmartin wrote:
> David Vallner wrote:
> It shouldnt add an extra level of complexity when I try to make an .exe
> file for an application will it?


I'm afraid I have precious little idea how rubyscript2exe works. I'm
quite sure it can handle native bindings somehow though - the package
would be nigh on useless if it couldn't, and I think the topic cropped
up on the list already. Search the archives for "rubyscript2exe" and
"dll" or "native" perhaps?

David Vallner

Mer Gilmartin

8/28/2006 3:11:00 PM

0

David Vallner wrote:

> I'm afraid I have precious little idea how rubyscript2exe works. I'm
> quite sure it can handle native bindings somehow though - the package
> would be nigh on useless if it couldn't, and I think the topic cropped
> up on the list already. Search the archives for "rubyscript2exe" and
> "dll" or "native" perhaps?
>
> David Vallner

thanks. will do.

--
Posted via http://www.ruby-....

jmg3000

8/28/2006 4:25:00 PM

0

On 8/28/06, David Vallner <david@vallner.net> wrote:
> Mer Gilmartin wrote:
> [snip]
>
> > Which is better? Or which should you use for what?
>
> Use the C binding I'd say. It'll be both faster, and the logic is
> performed by the "original" MySQL interface library, and because of that
> will probably be both more stable and complete.
>
> Use the pure Ruby binding if you have to deploy on a platform where you
> can't compile the extension, or where a binary gem isn't available.
> (Which leaves only rare edge cases - shell accounts on shared *nix boxes
> without GCC, or 64-bit Windowsen.)

This seems a bit unusual to me that the two projects have such similar
names: "MySQL/Ruby" vs. "Ruby/MySQL".

What seems to add to the confusion, is that the relevant kitebird
article http://www.kitebird.com/articles/ruby-... has "Ruby
MySQL" in the title, and "ruby-mysql" in the url, but seems to be
written about MySQL/Ruby.

BTW, how does Ruby/MySQL talk to the DBMS? Over port 3306, just like
the mysql client?

Also, that dev.mysql.com page says that Ruby/MySQL is included with
Rails. This means ActiveRecord uses it, right?

Finally, can Ruby-DBI (http://ruby-dbi.ruby...) use either
MySQL/Ruby or Ruby/MySQL?

Thanks,
---John

Mer Gilmartin

9/4/2006 3:32:00 PM

0

John Gabriele wrote:

> Also, that dev.mysql.com page says that Ruby/MySQL is included with
> Rails. This means ActiveRecord uses it, right?
>
> Finally, can Ruby-DBI (http://ruby-dbi.ruby...) use either
> MySQL/Ruby or Ruby/MySQL?
>
> Thanks,
> ---John


Not sure about the rest but the answer to these two is yes I think
from what i read.

--
Posted via http://www.ruby-....