View mode: basic / threaded / horizontal-split · Log in · Help
March 26, 2011
Re: [GSOC] Database API
On 26/03/2011 00:04, Trass3r wrote:
>> Another question about Digital Mars' GSOC involvement: when it's
>> application time do I submit a proposal to someone directly, to this
>> list, or to the GSOC site at http://www.google-melange.com ?
>
> You always have to apply via the google site.
> I'm sure I read that somewhere in the FAQs.

Yeah, exactly. Technically you don't strictly need to contact the 
organization before hand to submit the proposal, nor does the proposal 
have to be related to the ideas presented by the organization, the 
student can bring forth his own ideas.
But later the organization will rank each student proposal to eventually 
decide which ones get accepted, so of course it helps that the student 
has discussed the proposal before hand.

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer
March 26, 2011
Re: [GSOC] Database API
Christian Manning wrote:
> On 25/03/2011 14:56, Piotr Szturmaj wrote:
>> To sum up, Phobos need some additional changes for database support,
>> mainly addition of Nullable.
>
> For now, couldn't this just be included with the database module?

Yes. I think, currently this is the only option.
March 26, 2011
Re: [GSOC] Database API
On 3/26/11 12:44 AM, Masahiro Nakagawa wrote:
> Currently, many databases exist.
>
> * SQL based: MySQL, PostgresSQL, SQLite, etc..
> * KVS: Cassandra, HBase, Kumofs, Redis, etc...
> * Document Oriented: MongoDB, CouchDB, etc...
>
> I think next Database API should support these types.

I don't think this is the way to go, as there is a huge conceptional 
difference between relational database systems and »NoSQL« systems such 
as, say, CouchDB or Cassandra.

How would such a unified API look like?

David
March 28, 2011
Re: [GSOC] Database API
On 03/25/2011 09:02 AM, Christian Manning wrote:
> On 24/03/2011 17:58, Trass3r wrote:
>>> Has this idea/project been assigned a mentor? I'd like to ask them and
>>> the list, what's the best thing for me to do right now to prepare for
>>> this?
>>
>> You could also have a look at http://dsource.org/projects/ddbi
>> This shows some past efforts to create database interfaces.
>
> This can be of some inspiration and also brings up a point about how
> this project would be executed, ie. is this to be part of phobos or a
> totally separate project? I'm guessing to be Digital Mars supported it's
> more likely wanted to be a part of phobos, but could someone clarify on
> this?

Either way would be acceptable.

> Another question about Digital Mars' GSOC involvement: when it's
> application time do I submit a proposal to someone directly, to this
> list, or to the GSOC site at http://www.google-melange.com ?

You'll submit via Google's interface. See 
http://d-programming-language.org/gsoc2011.html for details. Submission 
opens tomorrow.


Andrei
March 28, 2011
Re: [GSOC] Database API
On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 07:11:01 +0900, David Nadlinger <see@klickverbot.at>  
wrote:

> On 3/26/11 12:44 AM, Masahiro Nakagawa wrote:
>> Currently, many databases exist.
>>
>> * SQL based: MySQL, PostgresSQL, SQLite, etc..
>> * KVS: Cassandra, HBase, Kumofs, Redis, etc...
>> * Document Oriented: MongoDB, CouchDB, etc...
>>
>> I think next Database API should support these types.
>
> I don't think this is the way to go, as there is a huge conceptional  
> difference between relational database systems and »NoSQL« systems such  
> as, say, CouchDB or Cassandra.

It's an open question.

Ruby / Rails has Arel (note that Arel is data access abstraction,
not database access abstraction. But Database access is a part of data  
access).
Haskell has Database.Persistent.
I think other languages will support similar library in the future.

> How would such a unified API look like?

I don't have a detail.
I already implemented it if I had a detailed design.
In my D tasks, database related task is low priority...
March 29, 2011
Re: [GSOC] Database API
Am 29.03.2011 01:18, schrieb Masahiro Nakagawa:
> On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 07:11:01 +0900, David Nadlinger <see@klickverbot.at>
> wrote:
>
>> On 3/26/11 12:44 AM, Masahiro Nakagawa wrote:
>>> Currently, many databases exist.
>>>
>>> * SQL based: MySQL, PostgresSQL, SQLite, etc..
>>> * KVS: Cassandra, HBase, Kumofs, Redis, etc...
>>> * Document Oriented: MongoDB, CouchDB, etc...
>>>
>>> I think next Database API should support these types.
>>
>> I don't think this is the way to go, as there is a huge conceptional
>> difference between relational database systems and »NoSQL« systems
>> such as, say, CouchDB or Cassandra.
>
> It's an open question.
>
> Ruby / Rails has Arel (note that Arel is data access abstraction,
> not database access abstraction. But Database access is a part of data
> access).
> Haskell has Database.Persistent.
> I think other languages will support similar library in the future.

I think proper support for relational databases with SQL is more 
important right now.
Once it is done some abstraction for generic data access can be 
developed, using the relational database support for these databases and 
something else (probably more specific to each NoSQL-Database, because 
AFAIK they are even less compatible to each other than relational DBs) 
for NoSQL-DBs.

Cheers,
- Daniel
Next ›   Last »
1 2
Top | Discussion index | About this forum | D home