Re: Maintaining simultaneous support for two Oracle versions in DBI

Richie <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.lang.perl.modules.dbi.general
Message-ID <[email protected]>
I might be overlooking something in your requirements, but this is a 
response that I had previously sent to someone on the list regarding 
migration concerns:

I'm going through a migration now and had to recompile DBD-Oracle 
against the new ORACLE_HOME.
I wanted to leave the old DBD-Oracle install in tact during my testing 
so I did not do a 'make install' after
compilation.  I took my test scripts, etc and used an appropriate 
PERL5LIB setting;
ie. 
PERL5LIB=/u99/testing/DBD-Oracle-1.23/blib/lib:/u99/testing/DBD-Oracle-1.23/blib/arch;
so it could would work while the old processes are able to use the 
current DBD-Oracle install.


On 12/2/2011 1:27 PM, Scott Smith wrote:
> My workplace is transitioning from Oracle version 9 to version 11. I 
> would like to build the DBD driver to support connecting to the Oracle 
> 11 database. However, until all the data are migrated from the old 
> database to the new one, I would need to maintain connectivity to the 
> old Oracle 9 database. Since the driver and shared objects built for 
> the new database would be incompatible, I would need to build separate 
> objects for the Oracle 11 connection.
>
> Some of the items I can identify are:
>
> The module should be Oracle11.pm rather than Oracle.pm (called as 
> DBI->connect("dbi:Oracle11:", ...) rather than 
> DBI->connect("dbi:Oracle:", ...)).
> The shared object and bootstrap files as Oracle11.so and Oracle11.bs 
> respectively. (Should these go in the same directory or should they be 
> in the directory Oracle11 and does the package name in Oracle11.pm 
> have to be changed to DBD::Oracle11 in order to find things there?)
>
> I have some idea of what I need to change in Makefile.PL in order to 
> achieve at least part of this. What I have so far is changing 
> references to Oracle.pm to Oracle11.pm and $opts{NAME} from 
> DBD::Oracle to Oracle 11. Am I right about the second? Are there 
> others I should have included?
>
> Thanks for any help,
> Scott Smith
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.