[Asterisk-Dev] Current database abstraction effort ?
nbougues-listes at axialys.net
Mon Jan 5 05:02:42 MST 2004
There wasn't any followup on my previous email regarding whether or
not the concerns I have about unixodbc are real.
So unless I get more feedback regarding unixodbc in the next few days,
I'll start working without it. The lighter the better, IMHO.
On Thu, Jan 01, 2004 at 01:19:06AM +0100, Nicolas Bougues wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 02:21:14PM -0300, CW_ASN wrote:
> > > It's definetly not a major issue, but before starting to work on it
> > > I'd like to know what the community has to say about it.
> > >
> > > I found a few references to the way the FreeRadius people did it, and
> > > I would probably make something similar, although there a a few things
> > > in their design that I would make otherwise.
> > I think that the best part of this could be to use ODBC routines implemented
> > by Brian, and I believe that it would not be very difficult to write this
> > module (I'm thinking mainly in routing stuff).
> I'm not familiar at all with ODBC. But this is not my main conern, I
> can learn.
> However, I'm wondering whether adding unixodbc requirement to do
> database handling may :
> - make building asterisk harder (more packages to get)
> - make it more prone to various lib incompatibilites (is unixodbc
> compatible between versions ?)
> - add some unnecessary complexity, and/or have significant a
> performance cost.
> - not provide that much of an help : how well is unixodbc (and its
> database drivers) packaged in the most widespread distros
> (Debian, RH/Fedora, Suse, MDK...) ?
> Could the people familiar with unixODBC share their views on these
> topics ?
More information about the asterisk-dev