[KLUG Members] database programming question

[bill]

On Tue, 2004-06-22 at 15:43, Bruce Smith wrote:

> I'm not making any argument (yet).  I'm simply asking questions, trying
> to understand some things and tell you our current setup.

Got it.  Still think you're thinking too hard.  Try it, you'll like it. 
If not, you can always take it off later.  You may -really- like it and
be bugging everybody later to move everything over to MySQL.  I make no
promises, but stranger things have happened.  I don't want to seem as if
I have a nefarious design.

> OK, I've been doing this programming thing for over a quarter of a
> century now, 

Yea, well, I've been programming for a quarter of an hour and think you
should consider it.  hehehe

> and I don't like where we're headed.  There is a big
> advantage of doing thing correctly.

Hard to do if you assume that whatever you're doing now must be better.

> Do I need to explain why duplication of data is bad?

Nope, and neither is having to re-key things in.  But Eberhard Faber is
not a member of KLUG, unless I missed an update.

> We don't have people beating down our doors with LAMP scripts, and
> walking away disappointed because we don't use MySQL.  And if we add
> MySQL, we're still not going to have any more interest.  I'm being
> realistic here, sorry!  (that's not counting your recent interest)

Well, I've been waiting for several years for someone besides myself to
do some website presentations.  Turns out I'm the only one.  I've wanted
to put the presentations on the KLUG server to demonstrate...  In any
case, we have -nobody- doing postgres presentations.  At least, if some
people picked up some ideas from the MySQL presentations they might
offer something.

> Popularity doesn't hold any credibility with me.  A Ford Escort may be
> more popular than a Cadillac, but it doesn't mean it's "better".
> </bad analogy>

Actually, if they keep selling well after people get a chance to try
them for a while then they are better for what people want.

> So, you're willing to help us if you can write PHP that says
> "mysql_query", but not if you have to spell it as "pg_query"?

Actually, I only offered to do a form and teach a class.  But, in the
future, if I offered any other programming, it would probably because
I've already done it elsewhere and hence wouldn't need to write
anything.

> How about if we spell it "odbc_query"?  (or whatever the ODBC call is)
> Then you won't have to know which DB you're using.  :-)

Actually I already wrote a form script for KLUG and sent it to Adam,
complete with notes about what functions were needed to handle cross-db
compatibility.  That was two weeks ago.  The script languishes forlornly
in a corner, waiting for someone to write these simple functions.  Why? 
I'd argue because it's not easy.

>  Why are MySQL's errors better?

That's just a funny line.  New Feature!  Better errors!

> Maybe a little more convincing is needed?  :-)

I fear the thread has passed from enlightening to boring.  

I cannot prove in advance it will offer you world domination.  
But if we don't try it, I know we won't see what it can do.

kind regards,

bill