3 databases in 3 days hga@xxxxxx (30 Sep 2019 00:36 UTC)
Support for Scheme standards and implementations Lassi Kortela (30 Sep 2019 08:11 UTC)
Re: Support for Scheme standards and implementations hga@xxxxxx (30 Sep 2019 11:25 UTC)
Scheme implementations and portability Lassi Kortela (30 Sep 2019 13:14 UTC)
Re: Scheme implementations and portability John Cowan (30 Sep 2019 19:27 UTC)
Scheme implementations, portability, FFIs Lassi Kortela (30 Sep 2019 21:16 UTC)
Re: Scheme implementations, portability, FFIs John Cowan (30 Sep 2019 22:10 UTC)
JDBC Lassi Kortela (30 Sep 2019 13:15 UTC)
Re: JDBC hga@xxxxxx (30 Sep 2019 13:24 UTC)
Re: JDBC and subprocess protocol Lassi Kortela (30 Sep 2019 14:29 UTC)
Re: JDBC and subprocess protocol hga@xxxxxx (30 Sep 2019 15:16 UTC)
Re: JDBC and subprocess protocol Lassi Kortela (30 Sep 2019 15:47 UTC)
Re: JDBC and subprocess protocol Lassi Kortela (30 Sep 2019 15:55 UTC)
Re: JDBC John Cowan (30 Sep 2019 15:10 UTC)
Re: JDBC Lassi Kortela (30 Sep 2019 15:26 UTC)
Re: JDBC Lassi Kortela (30 Sep 2019 15:34 UTC)
sdbi design in detail and MariaDB CONNECT hga@xxxxxx (30 Sep 2019 16:14 UTC)
Re: sdbi design in detail and MariaDB CONNECT Lassi Kortela (30 Sep 2019 16:28 UTC)
Re: sdbi design in detail and MariaDB CONNECT John Cowan (30 Sep 2019 20:25 UTC)
Re: JDBC John Cowan (30 Sep 2019 16:44 UTC)
Re: JDBC Lassi Kortela (30 Sep 2019 20:52 UTC)
Re: JDBC Alaric Snell-Pym (01 Oct 2019 09:26 UTC)
Re: JDBC hga@xxxxxx (01 Oct 2019 09:55 UTC)
Re: JDBC Alaric Snell-Pym (01 Oct 2019 11:09 UTC)

Re: JDBC Alaric Snell-Pym 01 Oct 2019 11:09 UTC
On 01/10/2019 10:54, xxxxxx@ancell-ent.com wrote:

>> In which case, I'm afraid to say, option (2) offers only rather poor
>> access to JDBC databases.
>
> That was a suggested, but discarded option, for reasons like you
> enumerate in your following snipped comments.

Phew!

> Looking at them one way, both JDBC and MariaDB CONNECT are ways of
> allowing sdbi to access more "databases" than the ones we'll be
> (eventually) supplying more direct methods for.  Scare quotes if
> you don't consider a CSV file to be a database.  Users can choose
> either if both for example support a serious database like Db2,
> but JDBC will be suggested option.

To be precise, I'd consider a CSV file perfectly eligible to be part of
a database. Some people have tried to draw some lines in the sand and
define "what is a database" - eg, ACID properties - but this usually
just encodes their prejudices, and inspires others to find useful ways
to store data that sits outside of that definition...

>
> - Harold
>

--
Alaric Snell-Pym   (M7KIT)
http://www.snell-pym.org.uk/alaric/