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


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

Re: Witch Oracle library should I use

Ball, Donald A Jr (Library)

5/8/2007 7:21:00 PM

> I know the DBI has been handed off at least once. My
> understanding was also that the current maintainers aren't
> too interested in resurrecting it. I agree that it works,
> but I'm not so sure not abandonware. I know there are some
> very old bugs in it still not fixed, though they are minor issues.
>
> Sequel is looking like a pretty promising library to replace
> the DBI, but it doesn't yet support Oracle:
>
> http://sequel.ruby...

Sequel seems to be more oriented towards ORM, competing with
ActiveRecord. Isn't there still a need for an abstract database
interaction layer underneath it, along the lines of JDBC for Java? I'd
naively thought that everyone was using DBI for that. What substantive
problems with DBI lead sequel, ActiveRecord, etc. to write their own
database-specific connection drivers?

- donald
2 Answers

James Gray

5/8/2007 7:38:00 PM

0

On May 8, 2007, at 2:20 PM, Ball, Donald A Jr (Library) wrote:

>> I know the DBI has been handed off at least once. My
>> understanding was also that the current maintainers aren't
>> too interested in resurrecting it. I agree that it works,
>> but I'm not so sure not abandonware. I know there are some
>> very old bugs in it still not fixed, though they are minor issues.
>>
>> Sequel is looking like a pretty promising library to replace
>> the DBI, but it doesn't yet support Oracle:
>>
>> http://sequel.ruby...
>
> Sequel seems to be more oriented towards ORM, competing with
> ActiveRecord.

True. Of course, ActiveRecord can issue low-level queries and return
results. You don't have to use it's high-level ORM layer. That
almost makes it a viable alternative to the DBI, though some features
are not present or well exposed from the lower-level.

As for reasons: I sure find ActiveRecord easier to install for one.

James Edward Gray II

Daniel Berger

5/16/2007 4:50:00 PM

0

James Edward Gray II wrote:
> On May 8, 2007, at 2:20 PM, Ball, Donald A Jr (Library) wrote:
>
>>> I know the DBI has been handed off at least once. My
>>> understanding was also that the current maintainers aren't
>>> too interested in resurrecting it. I agree that it works,
>>> but I'm not so sure not abandonware. I know there are some
>>> very old bugs in it still not fixed, though they are minor issues.
>>>
>>> Sequel is looking like a pretty promising library to replace
>>> the DBI, but it doesn't yet support Oracle:
>>>
>>> http://sequel.ruby...
>>
>> Sequel seems to be more oriented towards ORM, competing with
>> ActiveRecord.
>
> True. Of course, ActiveRecord can issue low-level queries and return
> results. You don't have to use it's high-level ORM layer. That almost
> makes it a viable alternative to the DBI, though some features are not
> present or well exposed from the lower-level.

Last I checked ActiveRecord still did not handle bind parameters, which
means it's regenerating the execution plan every time it executes a query.

Regards,

Dan