pbxt-discuss team mailing list archive

[Martin Scholl <ms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi again,

On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 2:58 PM, Paul McCullagh
<paul.mccullagh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[snip]
>> This is the way we're looking at it for innodb. using the embedded
>> innodb library (and just linking to it) instead of porting the whole
>> innobase codebase.
>
> Makes sense. So in the long run (or maybe sooner) embedded PBXT would the way to go for Drizzle as well.
>
> However, as I mentioned previously, the data types, including comparison functions are external to the PBXT kernel.
>
> We would need a way for Drizzle to declare what types it uses, and supply the comparison functions. At least for all types that are not standard C types.
We need this anyways if we like to have library-user-supplied data-types.
Actually this worries me the most. If we like to stick with Drizzle's
table.proto, this will not be an easy task:

[...]
  message Field {

    enum FieldType {
      DOUBLE = 0;
      VARCHAR = 1;
      BLOB = 2;
      ENUM = 3;
      INTEGER = 4;
      BIGINT = 5;
      DECIMAL = 6;
      DATE = 7;
      TIME = 8;
      TIMESTAMP = 9;
      DATETIME = 10;
    }
[...]
}


>
> This method has the advantage the we are sure that the engine handles data types in the exact same was as the server.

>> Proto is very, very easy :)
>
> Well, you've made a good case. Thanks for your input.
>
> Martin: it is up to you. You are doing the work... :)
Proto then ... :-).



Martin