what interest in the community is there? how would a branch of the code sound?
i have some interest in building out support for a schema browser for mssql-specific tds connections as i have to administer such databases at work. i would prefer not to have to connect to windows servers/machines for management studio as having a schema browser makes support easier. tora would be that one-stop-shop, so to speak, native on linux.
this inclusion looks fairly do-able as we could snap in the queries to the system views, as what was done with sapdb and mysql. however, some of the system view queries would not be compatible with sybase, if someone were to point their tds connection at that engine.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Sounds like a great idea to me! Branch would make sense for initial development, but once it was working and patch minimized (i.e. just get the support working and functional) I'd say to merge it back in. If the initial patch to get the support added isn't very invasive though, a branch wouldn't necessarily even be required.
Definitely sign on to the tora-develop mailing list as that is where most (though not very much) development discussion takes place.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
what interest in the community is there? how would a branch of the code sound?
i have some interest in building out support for a schema browser for mssql-specific tds connections as i have to administer such databases at work. i would prefer not to have to connect to windows servers/machines for management studio as having a schema browser makes support easier. tora would be that one-stop-shop, so to speak, native on linux.
this inclusion looks fairly do-able as we could snap in the queries to the system views, as what was done with sapdb and mysql. however, some of the system view queries would not be compatible with sybase, if someone were to point their tds connection at that engine.
Sounds like a great idea to me! Branch would make sense for initial development, but once it was working and patch minimized (i.e. just get the support working and functional) I'd say to merge it back in. If the initial patch to get the support added isn't very invasive though, a branch wouldn't necessarily even be required.
Definitely sign on to the tora-develop mailing list as that is where most (though not very much) development discussion takes place.
just do it like Mike with Terradata support. He branched tora to its special tree. When he said it's stable enough it was merged back to the trunk.
Anyway - I'm very interested in this extension.
sounds good. i'll also sign on to the tora-develop mailing list.
Has there been any progress on this, tokenmathguy? As a guy that has to work on both Oracle and MSSQL all day long…this would be great!