Re: Benchmarks
| From: | Pierre-Alain Joye | Date: | Thu, 05 Jun 2003 14:37:34 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Benchmarks | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-17075@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Thu, 5 Jun 2003 16:29:40 +0200
Björn Schotte <bjoern@thinkphphq.de> wrote:
> And now we are at the point of different definitions of an
> abstraction layer. I see it as a "lightweight" abstraction
> layer, fast, KISS and not fat.
There are not many definitions of an abstraction layer. A real
abstraction layer abstract everything and should work completely
transparent with any DB it supports, regardless to the queries or datas.
MDB tends to be a real abstraction layer, there is still the query
problems and this is one of the most difficult part (impossible? ;) ) to
implement.
I remember a very good wrapper called phpdb (it was even one of the 1st)
or something like that done by a good guy from Asia (3 years ago or so),
really lightweight and damn fast. These kind of wrappers are not
difficult to implement. We have all wrote such things, does that mean
there is a place for a 3rd foobarDB in PEAR?
imho, no. We should better help MDB and DB maintainers in preference to
create another system. That's true for all packages in PEAR ( see the
meeting summary).
hth
pierre