Re: RDBMS comparison tool

On 01/01/2013 03:12, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
> Thanks for doing this work, it's good to see someone poking at
> this. +1 for getting the DBDs somewhat consistent, although it
> may be tricky as some (looking at you, MySQL!) play more fast and
> loose with their data type definitions than others. :)

BTW, I looked into the MySQL type issues further an ended up submitting 
a bug with patch:
http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=68266

Although SQL_DECIMAL says it's mapped to DOUBLE it's actually correctly 
mapped to MYSQL_TYPE_DECIMAL which I presume is exact numeric (it 
certainly looks like it form my testing).

SQL_BIT's mapping on the other hand was just plain wrong, and it's not 
able to auto_increment.

DBD::Pg makes no effort to check the DB version and report more accurate 
type lists. I don't know how far I'll be able to get with that, but I'll 
start a conversation on the DBD::Pg mailing list as you suggested.


Lyle