Re: [gtk-list] Re: GNOME Database kit ODBC interface
- From: Elliot Lee <sopwith redhat com>
- To: Ian McKellar <imckellar harvestroad com au>
- cc: "'gtk-list redhat com'" <gtk-list redhat com>
- Subject: Re: [gtk-list] Re: GNOME Database kit ODBC interface
- Date: Fri, 7 Aug 1998 02:43:20 -0400 (EDT)
On Fri, 7 Aug 1998, Ian McKellar wrote:
> Having read the JDBC book and having spoken to people who've had to use it
> it sounds pretty horrific.
I don't do Java :) How does JDBC compare to ODBC?
> And with industry standards: just because its an industry standard doesn't
> mean its good - for example:
> Industry standard desktop OS: Windows9[58]
> Industry standard server OS: WindowsNT
> Industry standard X11 Desktop: CDE
> Industry standard X11 Toolkit: Motif
>
> If someone is going to be using GNOME then they're not going to be concerning
> themselves with the "industry standard".
Agreed, but that doesn't mean we have to revolt against industry standards
just because they are such, though.
> How about we rip off the API for JDBC, and implement it over CORBA. This
> could work because:
> * the JDBC api is pretty good.
I thought you said it was horrific...?
> * it would be easy to write a Java 1.2 GDBC -> JDBC bridge, and hence use
> the JDBC -> ODBC bridge.
> * virtually all significant database vendors have written JDBC drivers.
> * if we base our API on JDBC, then it would be easy for database vendors to
> rewrite their JDBC drivers for our GNOME standard.
Is JDBC a wire protocol or a Java database API?
Provide URL's, and I will read :)
> * JDBC is emering as an industry standard :)
"emerging" != "is"
We could always use the "industry standard" OMG database spec, but that'd
be just another potion to add to the brew,
-- Elliot
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]