SQL backend consolidation

Nikolaj Hald Nielsen nhnfreespirit at gmail.com
Wed Aug 15 18:15:39 CEST 2007

I like the idea of just targeting one database. I know that some
people swear by postgress/mysql/whatever but I really think the vast
majority of our users really don't care and just use whatever we ship
as default ( as long as it is "good enough" ). This will be even more
so once we are running on Windows and Mac as well I think.

Also, any time saved not struggling with different database backends
allows for more time spent actually doing productive stuff :-)

- Nikolaj

On 8/15/07, Maximilian Kossick <mkossick at gmx.de> wrote:
> On Wednesday 15 August 2007, Ian Monroe wrote:
> > Markey and I were talking about how we should perhaps drop Postgresql
> > and Sqlite, and just use MySQL embedded (in-process mysql support) and
> > perhaps support external MySQL as well.
> >
> > The primary advantage would be we'd have less to support. Just MySQL.
> > Supporting sqlite, mysql and postgresql has been a real burden. The
> > secondary advantage is the MySQL 5 is almost a real database and it
> > has a lot of features we could take advantage of. Views, probably more
> > consistency checking. Currently we are held back by the limited subset
> > of SQL that sqlite supports. Also recent versions of sqlite have been
> > having corruption fixes.
> >
> > What do folks think?
> > Ian
> Has anybody found out yet which database Nepomuk will use?
> The corruption problems with sqlite are a problem, but do we actually need
> advanced SQL features like views?
> Max
> _______________________________________________
> Amarok-devel mailing list
> Amarok-devel at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/amarok-devel

More information about the Amarok-devel mailing list