Re: Patch for MS SQL Server 2000 via ODBC

lisp wrote:
> The attached patches are for an interface to Microsoft SQL Server 2000
> via the ODBC interface.
> They implement an underlying database type :mssqlserver for the generic
> odbc interface.
> The patches are relative to the 3.3.0 release.

Hi Dominic,

This is an interesting patch. In general, I'm glad to add support for
MSSQL, though I have some relucatance in that I don't have MSSQL
available to me and I'm not able to help with development and testing.
Nonetheless, I think it is a win to add support for MSSQL.

> This code has been tested on LispWorks Pro 4.4.5 on Windows XP.
> The unit tests (with minor modifications and exclusions) all pass ok
> with MS SQL Server.

That's good, thanks for that information.

> I've tried not to break anything else, but I don't have the other
> backends set up to be able to test against them.

Not breaking is good, but I think your patch needs to be more
integrated (see below).

> This is the first time I've created a patch so please bear with me if
> there any howlers in here.

In the future, it'd be easier to submit a single, recursive unified
diff. Such as:

diff -ur clsql-3.3.x my-clsql-tree > patchfile

I see a few issues with your patch. First, since the interface is
odbc, it would be perferred is your patch did not create a new backend
but rather was integrated into the current odbc backend. ODBC backends
do vary in functionality. That's why I store the odbc-db-type so
behaviour can be accounted for at runtime. I see that you override
some of the generic functions to express the characteristics of
MSSQL. That's good. However, rather than creating a whole new backend,
could you set and use odbc-db-type to control the behavior of the ODBC
backend? The odbc db type is stored in the
STORE-TYPE-OF-CONNECTED-DATABASE function in odbc-sql.lisp. 

I set some of the odbc backend in sql/generic-odbc.lisp so that both
the db-odbc and db-aodbc backends can share the same logic. That'd
probably be the best place to put some of the MSSQL-specific
behavior. I expect that Allegro's aodbc can talk to MSSQL via ODBC
fine.

Second, rather than :mssqlserver, I perfer :mssql as a type. It's
shorter and the 'server' component of your name doesn't do anything to
uniquely identify one SQL server engine from another.

Thanks again for the contribution. I look forward to hearing your
thoughts about integrating your MSSQL support into the current ODBC
backend.

Kevin


  


> _______________________________________________
> CLSQL-Devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.b9.com/mailman/listinfo/clsql-devel

-- 
Kevin Rosenberg
kevin-HJRc7zDS/[email protected]