2014-10-02 17:26 GMT-03:00 Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu>:
Esteban,
On 02 Oct 2014, at 20:43, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo@gmail.com> wrote:
2014-10-02 15:19 GMT-03:00 Stephan Eggermont <stephan@stack.nl>:
Esteban wrote:
Are you using/planning to use PostgresV3?
What are its advantages over current driver (PostgresV2)?
I was puzzled that a smart developer like Levente decides not to use Glorp.
I don't want to sound harsh, but there is no VISIBLE interest from the Pharo board/committee regarding ORM and/or RDBMS support other than a CI task. Few days ago I asked a question in the Pharo-Business regarding this, and got NO REPLY.
This week I was looking into Python's SQLAlchemy [1] to find how close it is to GLORP current features, and also found out how far it seems/feels to a small community like ours. Not to mention things like jOOQ[2] ([1] provides some of its features though).
I'm making no demands here, just giving my opinion about a "business feature" (DBs) that I'd like better supported.
I understand your pain, you're looking for people that are in the same boat, apparently there aren't that many. But there certainly are some (I use(d) Glorp+PostgresV2 myself, I believe Mariano does too), but it seems nobody wants to take the lead to push this (even) further. I am not sure this is necessarily bad, RDBMS does not move that much, but it would obviously be better to have more users.
We are a small(er) community, it is what it is, but we are growing.
The quid here is who takes the lead, I said I could contribute and code, but taking the lead on a project requires more than coding skills. The point that RDBMS is a stable thing a benefit in this case, and that's why those who use GLORP today (like me), only got bitten by a few bugs due to an outdated port. And as long as we use PostgreSQL we'll be in the safer zone.
Is the V2/V3 spec a PostgreSQL protocol spec or something made up in the Squeak community? I know something changed in PgSQL protocols around version 7.2.
V2 and V3 are indeed two different wire level protocols for a DB client to talk to PostgreSQL. Obviously, V3 came after V2, it should be considered an improvement, but V2 remains supported. As far as I understood it, V3 is binary while V2 is text oriented, the former should be faster. I am sure there are feature lists comparing the two somewhere out there. Of course, the implementation quality of the driver is important too to get good performance.
I haven't reached any limits of the V2 driver yet. If I have a bottleneck it is down the DB or at the app level. Thank you!