Re: [Semanticscuttle-devel] SQL Calls

[Christian W. <cw...@cw...>]

Hi Mark,


> > What's the state of the private feed link? I'd like to see this
> > finished first.
> Agreed, hope to have this done shortly.  Got into cleaning up code
> which helped me get more familiar with the code.  My desire is to
> have it completely tested by the weekend (depending on my schedule).
No need to rush, it's a spare time project :)


> > Regarding the SQL calls: I don't like AdoDB that is used in
> > semantiscuttle currently, and would rather switch to PEAR's MDB2 or
> > plain PDO. MDB2 does real abstraction but is PHP4 (thus not E_STRICT
> > compatible), whereas PDO does not really do any abstraction but is
> > available in PHP itself and fast.
> > Do you have any preferences?
> This is a tough call because it depends on where our focus is.  We can
> certainly go with PDO which is a great standard and has little
> overhead. The downside is that to support multiple databases would
> require altering the SQL commands based on the database type.  An
> alternative is something like Active Record (Propel, Doctrine, etc)
> where everything is contained in the class.  The downside to AR is
> that it has a huge overhead and requires bytecode cache to maximize
> performance.  So the question is, what is our focus: do we focus on
> having less overhead with PDO and refining what db's we support or go
> with Active Record?  I personally think that AR may have too much
> overhead than what we really need (but would be really cool).

I would also prefer PDO since it's fast and doesn't have much overhead.
An ORM is too large for us IMO. So let's go with PDO.


-- 
Regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Christian Weiske

-= Geeking around in the name of science since 1982 =-