[OPEN-ILS-DEV] OpenILS::Util::StoredProc

[Galen Charlton]

Hi,

On Dec 20, 2010, at 12:37 PM, Mike Rylander wrote:
> As far as the namespacing is concerned, would there be objection to
> putting it under OpenILS::Application::Storage::Driver::Pg, perhaps as
> OpenILS::Application::Storage::Driver::Pg::StoredProcedures, and then
> load the right module for testing based on the driver name
> (defaulting, obviously, to "Pg") specified?

Fine with me.

> Of course, we /could/ start the debate about removing db product
> abstraction, as I don't know of any other db that supports perl as a
> stored proc language (to mention but one feature we depend on right
> now, though far from the only), but that seems like a lot more work
> than we want to get into today... :)

Indeed. :)  FWIW, I don't see any compelling reason at present to switch from Postgres or support another DBMS for exactly that reason.  The main theoretical use cases I see for keeping up the DBMS abstraction layer is if Postgres ever forks or if we encounter a situation where keeping certain types of data in a secondary DBMS becomes worth the pain (and ACID consequences) of multiplexing the database back ends.

Regards,

Galen
--
Galen Charlton
VP, Data Services
Equinox Software, Inc. / Your Library's Guide to Open Source
email:  gmc at esilibrary.com
direct: +1 352-215-7548
skype:  gmcharlt
web:    http://www.esilibrary.com/