FreeTDS Development Group

[adrian AT alexa.com (Adrian Blakey)]

Talk about getting the right people's attention very fast :-)

I'll send some nice errors in a separate email. I also do not seem to be
getting values back from stored procedures that have OUTPUT params -- but
that might be pilot error.

-----Original Message-----
From: bounce-freetds-96490 AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
[mailto:bounce-freetds-96490 AT franklin.oit.unc.edu]On Behalf Of Michael
Peppler
Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 1999 3:13 PM
To: TDS Development Group
Subject: [freetds] Re: DBD::FreeTDS


Adrian Blakey writes:
 > Firstly, FreeTDS is a godsend -- thank you.
 >
 > I am testing TDS .5 on RH Linux against a MS SS Ver 7.0.
 >
 > I got and tried to make DBD::FreeTDS 0.02, but it does not seem to be
 > maintained judging from the compile errors.

You are correct. I actually think that it should be removed from
CPAN.

 >
 > So I have been testing with DBD::Sybase, built using the FreeTDS libs.
 >
 > Things mostly work, however error handling and reporting is not up to the
 > same level as if DBD::Sybase were linked with the Sybase libs.

I'd love to get some specifics on this.

 > So I wonder if there would be any point in forking the DBD::Sybase
codeline
 > and doing a better job of providing a DBD::FreeTDS?

I'm not convinced that DBD::Sybase can't be made to behave correctly
with both implementations, but I'm open to suggestions. In any case
the DBD::Sybase code isn't all that complicated :-)

 >
 > This makes me wonder about about impedance matches between the libs,
 > protocol and server.
 >
 > Sybase considers ctLib its annointed interface to TDS 5.0 and Adaptive
 > Server Enterprise. And they probably do not want to help out MS by
extending
 > ctLib.
 >
 > Microsoft has no ctLib implementation and is interested in furthering
dbLib
 > as the interface to TDS 7.0 and Sql Server.

Doesn't Microsoft push ODBC over DBlibrary?

 > FreeTDS exports TDS 7.0 functionality through the reimplemented FreeTDS
 > ctLib -- there is no dblib (rightly so). Therefore, are there ctLib
 > functions which either behave differently or not at all when directed at
a
 > MS database? So will it be necessary to implement some ctLib functions
that
 > are not part of the Sybase "standard" library to support MS?

I guess Brian and/or others who are using the TDS 7 stuff will have to
step in here...

Michael
--
Michael Peppler         -||-  Data Migrations Inc.
mpeppler AT peppler.org    -||-  http://www.mbay.net/~mpeppler
Int. Sybase User Group  -||-  http://www.isug.com
Sybase on Linux mailing list: ase-linux-list AT isug.com

---
You are currently subscribed to freetds as: ajb AT alexa.com
To unsubscribe, forward this message to
$subst('Email.Unsub')