Re: Database Support - Conversion to Sqlite
Lincoln Phipps <[email protected]> Sat, 01 Nov 2008 16:04:09 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.gnome.apps.planner.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Maurice van der Pot wrote: > Hi Chris, > > I don't know much about databases, so forgive me if my remarks do not > make sense. =) > > > On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 04:22:19PM -0400, Chris Peachment wrote: >> I am using Sqlite in place of PostGresSql >> for a variety of reasons not relevant here. >> >> Converting the version 0.14.3 database >> schema is relatively straightforward but it >> reveals a number of identifiers that might >> be reserved words in some database products >> and thus require back tick quoting or cause >> syntax errors. >> >> Specifically: >> >> -- day as table name >> -- date as field in day table >> -- start as field in task table >> -- work as field in task table >> -- type as field in predecessor table >> -- value as field in property table > > Any backwards-compatible changes we should just do right away. I still > have a patch in the works to remove support for libgda < 3 and add > proper quoting of data. Are you saying this cannot always be solved by > quoting? Tell me more. > >> In addition, the task priority field is >> supplied in the XML .planner file but is not >> in the database schema. > > Can this be added in a backwards-compatible way? If so, can you provide > a patch? I had provided the patch for the priority field back in 2004 when I had patched the code to use the priority field for the task see... http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=137544 or the attachment... http://bugzilla.gnome.org/attachment.cgi?id=26383 AFAIK we did increment the schema to a new version 0.11 to include the priority field. Note that the priority field has had the intent to have the range as 0,1 ...9999 > >> As a more general comment, I note that the >> names chosen for both tables and fields are >> often generic and at risk of name space >> collision when the Planner tables are >> integrated with other tables. Their generic >> nature might also be misleading in a bigger >> schema where other parts of the database >> has similar content. > > Isn't the planner database the namespace? Why would any non-planner data > end up in the planner database? We always wanted to have table name prefixes just like every other nicely behaving database application. ..... Regards, Lincoln (Still lurking) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJDG/pVo/F3CLIt9cRAvTpAJ93H3IH6uLxSvhRG9kiizCywb1UXQCfcaOe kziAOSaOSDgdM5fW2lYhR2I= =E6io -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----