Re: Sybase and Sybase-CT and MSSQL, oh my?

From: Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2001 02:37:39 +0000
Subject: Re: Sybase and Sybase-CT and MSSQL, oh my?
References: 1  Groups: php.dev 
Request: Send a blank email to php-dev+get-65415@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message
On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Frank M. Kromann wrote: > I would also like to see ext/mssql and ext/sybase merged into one extension, > as they both use the same DB-Librery. Changing the functionsnames to dblib_* > would also be the right, as long as we keep aliases_* to sybase and mssql_* > for some time. Hmm. I see some clear benefits to moving the extension to ext/dblib, but I'm not sure how much it's to the benefit of consumers of this extension if the function names are changed to dblib_*. In comparison, the functions from ext/sybase_ct all simply use the sybase_ prefix, with mssql_* aliases, even though the extension name is neither 'sybase' nor 'mssql'. This, I think, is what users of the API are looking for; they don't care if the underlying implementation uses ctlib, dblib, or something else. OTOH, using dblib_* as the authoritative names does have the advantage of putting the 'mssql' and 'sybase' monikers on equal footing. In my patch to ext/mssql (which I'll forward to you separately, so as not to clutter the list), I've completely reversed the precedence of mssql_* vs sybase_* with the reasoning that 'sybase' is the more historically accurate name for this library -- but I don't want to turn the CVS tree into a battlefield between Unix and Windows supporters. :) > I havent started implementing a new MSSQL extension yet for two resons. 1) I > would like to have the extension working on more than one platform and 2) I > have a dialog with Microsoft about an updated version of there DBLibrary, > but it is going very slow. Hmm, would be interesting if they did update DBLibrary... > I have also thaught about writing my own system based on OLE DB. An OLE DB > service (broaker) should be installed on an NT/2000 box and a client library > should be installed on NT/2000/Linux/Unix. This would allow the client to > request data from the broker and the broker could query any OLE DB provider > available. How would this compare with the existing ODBC-based extension? Cheers, Steve Langasek postmodern programmer

« previous php.dev (#65415) next »