2015-10-12 14:05 GMT-03:00 Torsten Bergmann <astares@gmx.de>:
Hi Esteban,
we noticed the same "copy reuse" issue with NBSQlite.
See this thread: http://forum.world.st/Garage-and-SQLite-file-databases-general-project-struc...
which ended up in a different discussion on URLs. I did not really understood but had not time to look deeper and reproduce Guilles arguments clearly.
Yeap, I remember seeing such discussion. But I got on it when it was a discussion about URLs, didn't see the part of the fork. But if it is the same with NBSQlite as it is with PostgresV2 then it's a waste of resources[1], as I suspected, it is not an "common API" for Database connectivity, but instead it is a fork of database drivers to work under a common API using inheritance rather than composition to reach the multi-driver approach. :-/ Regards, Esteban A. Maringolo [1]: It breaks rules #1, #3, #4, #13, #16 and #17 of the unix philosophy :)
Thanks T.
Gesendet: Montag, 12. Oktober 2015 um 16:57 Uhr Von: "Esteban A. Maringolo" <emaringolo@gmail.com> An: "Pharo Developers" <pharo-dev@lists.pharo.org> Betreff: [Pharo-dev] Relation between Garage PG and PGv2
Hi all, and Guille Polito in particular,
I'm loading the Garage classes into Pharo 4, and I see the Garage-Postgres package "duplicates" the classes of the PostgresV2 package, but instead of using the PG prefix, it uses the GA prefix. This is in particular with the case of Garage-Postgres-Protocol package.
Why is it so?
Because even GAConnection>>#buildDefaultConnectionArgs (which is a replica of PGConnection) references PGConnectionArgs instead of GAConnectionArgs, which is the replica of the first.
QUESTION: Isn't Garage a "common API" for the *existing* drivers? (like a common wrapper), and if so it delegates the protocol handling to the real driver? In the PostgresV2 package in this case, to PG prefixed classes.
Regards!
Esteban A. Maringolo