Re: fixes on gda-oracle-server (fwd) [WatchDog checked]

[Stephan Heinze <Stephan Heinze xcom de>]

at Thu, 16 Dec 1999 22:58:22 Rodrigo Moya wrote:

[-snip-]

> That's why the schema implementation is like this. There is a function
> called
> gda_connection_open_schema, which accepts a variable list of constraints.
> These
> constraints is what we must define (and, of course, the data returned by
> each
> one). There is no need to touch the IDL files. For example:
>
> TABLES_SCHEMA -> returns table name and comments
> TABLES_SCHEMA, EXTRA_INFO -> table name, create_command, .......
> COLUMNS_SCHEMA, TABLE_NAME, "table_name" -> description of table
> "table_name"
> ...
> This is what we must define. A server could respond to all of these
> schemas, but
> some other may just respond to the ones it wants (or can). If a server
> responds
> to a schema,  it must return exactly the same data as defined by this
> schema,
> but it can ignore the specific schema and return nothing.

okay - I'm going to implement it that way.

TABLES_SCHEMA,
TABLES_SCHEMA, EXTRA_INFO
VIEWS_SCHEMA,
VIEWS_SCHEMA, EXTRA_INFO (same way like tables ...)
COLUMNS_SCHEMA, TABLE_SCHEMA, ...

who's collecting the definitions?
new requests to the list?

> About what you say about the bases, I was thinking to change the server's
> implementation to orbit-cpp, which, as I've seen, produces an
> easier-to-read
> code. One of the problems right now is to understand the ORBit stuff, it
> took me
> months to understand it.

...downloading orb-doc and orbit-cpp-doc... :)

sure to use it - gnome is using ORBit, 'cause plain c is much more portable than
c++.
why do you wanna switch back to c++?

kind regards

stephan