MS SQL connection from Linux
[1/9] from: ammon::rcslv::com at: 14-Apr-2002 19:17
Hi,
I am running Command on Linux & I need to connect to an M$ SQL Server. Has
this been done? can it be done? I know that it is possible to get ODBC for
Linux, I was just wondering if it was necisary.
Thanks!!
Ammon
[2/9] from: gavin:mckenzie:sympatico:ca at: 14-Apr-2002 23:54
I drive a MS SQL Server 2000 box with Core via SQL Server 2000's built-in
HTTP and XML support.
It's a wonderful thing. You can do everything you want with SQL commands
over HTTP, get result-sets back as XML documents, and you can setup XML
documents on the server side that contain queries, XSLT transforms, etc.
Gavin.
[3/9] from: maarten:koopmans:surfnet:nl at: 15-Apr-2002 9:30
Hi,
Command (2.0 and up) have built-in Mysql support ;-)
I have used it extensively under Linux, but....
- strange errors in datatype conversion sometimes happen
- it is *slow*
OTOH: DocKimbel (Reb/sites/DocKimbel) made a tcp based
mysql driver that runs on Core 2.5! It is up to 30 times faster and
has *no* problems I know off. You can simple 'do' it to replace the
built-in Command implementation, and it has the same way of calling.
HTH,
Maarten
Ammon Johnson wrote:
[4/9] from: petr:krenzelok:trz:cz at: 15-Apr-2002 10:16
Maarten Koopmans wrote:
> Hi,
> Command (2.0 and up) have built-in Mysql support ;-)
<<quoted lines omitted: 5>>
> has *no* problems I know off. You can simple 'do' it to replace the
> built-in Command implementation, and it has the same way of calling.
I haven't done any testing myself yet, but if it is so, it's pretty ...
ehm .... Our company paind 700 USD for /Command, which does not seem to
be up-to-date enough to compete with free implementation? I think that
once DocKimbel releases his free FastCGI protocol, someone else does
ODBC library wrapper and there is no reason anymore for anyone to buy
/Command, as everything else is in View/Pro ... ;-) ... ah .... I forgot
there is no Core/Pro, so Unix users would still be required to buy
Command, because of that X11 gfx thing ....
-pekr-
[5/9] from: maarten:koopmans:surfnet:nl at: 15-Apr-2002 10:40
Ah.. I read the subject again. Ms-sql
Sorry...
--Maarten
Maarten Koopmans wrote:
[6/9] from: maarten:koopmans:surfnet:nl at: 15-Apr-2002 12:18
I know, I know. Mailed it to feedback 6 months ago or so.
But... Oracle support on Linux was also necessary, so Command
was the right choice. Even better: you can easily replace the mysql
protocol in Command, so...
Nevertheless, their C mysql implementation has room for improvement ;-)
Another thing: The pure REBOL solution by DocKimbel is faster (!)
than the C implementation on the REBOL layer ;-)
They are better than they think at RT!
--Maarten
Petr Krenzelok wrote:
[7/9] from: petr:krenzelok:trz:cz at: 15-Apr-2002 13:25
Maarten Koopmans wrote:
> I know, I know. Mailed it to feedback 6 months ago or so.
> But... Oracle support on Linux was also necessary, so Command
<<quoted lines omitted: 4>>
> than the C implementation on the REBOL layer ;-)
> They are better than they think at RT!
Ha! Then those trying to develop Rebol in Java, should try to develop
Rebol in Rebol itself ... :-) Anyway - IOS has to be making them real
money, as business Rebol users = Command users are being left one year
without the single, and as I can see from your post, it really needs an
update :-) ... Or just maybe they sold Command just to you and me, so it
is not worth to update it? ;-)
-pekr-
[8/9] from: ammon:rcslv at: 15-Apr-2002 6:18
This sounds like the most likely solution for me ;-) I guess I will grab the
'Teach Yourself XML in....' & give it a go. ;-)
Thanks!!
Ammon
A short time ago, Gavin F. McKenzie, sent an email stating:
[9/9] from: sqlab:gmx at: 15-Apr-2002 14:40
> Maarten Koopmans wrote:
> > Hi,
<<quoted lines omitted: 19>>
> -pekr-
> >
I did an ODBC-wrapper in Command1.0 times and from time to time I am still
using it with /View or Command2.0, as it is more flexible than the native
implementation.
But I think it has a few memory flaws and is not made according Rebol/port
conventions.
I have a tcp/ip connection to the Cache ODBC&JDBC-server port too.
If anyone wants to clean them up...
AR
Notes
- Quoted lines have been omitted from some messages.
View the message alone to see the lines that have been omitted