[Mono-list] Review of mono's ADO.NET
28 May 2003 12:46:40 +0200
On Wed, 2003-05-28 at 02:17, Francisco Figueiredo Jr. wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-05-27 at 18:03, Reggie Burnett wrote:
> >> Marco
> >> Though I haven't had a lot of time lately to update it, I have been the
> >> general maintainer of the MySQL provider named ByteFX.Data. It is
> pure C#
> >> and has been accepted has the replacement for the original
> >> provider (which used libmysql.so)
> Hi Marco, I hope you don't mind I answer some of the questions which
> also apply to Npgsql, a data provider for Postgresql which works on Mono
> and also in MS runtime. Thanks Daniel Morgan and Mono Team, it was
> accepted as one provider for Postgresql on Mono.
Oh really thanks!
> >What're the motivations that conduced you to implement a provider in
> >pure C#?
> The main motivation was to work with a type of programming I like most:
> middleware software (I mean, any software piece which is not directly
> related to user application but in its infrastructure) and the
> opportunity to implement a protocol.
> Also, there is the dependency issues. IMHO, with the 100% managed
> provider you don't have to worry about .so/.dll files. I mean, I looked
> at Java model, and I think the model 4 drivers are much more flexible
> and so, I tooked the same approach when developing Npgsql.
> >Isn't it more difficult to mantain than the wrapper over
> I think that at first it could be more difficult. As you have to do all
> the work which already exists in the .so/.dll. But once you did the base
> code, things start to become less harder.
> > Is the right man power allocated for this project?
> I think so. At gborg we have already some good guys helping and here at
> Mono we got more good guys too.
> > What kind of maturity has MySQLNEt reached?
> Npgsql will be short in the 0.5 version (I wil be doing a new release
> soon). It already supports a lot of expected functionality and support
> for most common datatypes (bool, int2, int4, int8, timestamp, text and
> numeric). It allows you to work with datasets, the dataadapter allows
> you to select, insert, update and delete data. you have transaction
> support and md5 authentication. There are many bugs yet, and many
> features missing as connection pool, support for user data types, but I
> hope we can get it working soon. :)
> In another mail Marco asks:
> >But what I wanna know is: is it really faster than the wrapper?
> >And if yes, does the gap between them justifie the effort of mantaining
> >a native provider?
> I didn't do this comparison. But at long time, I think it could be as
> fast as or faster, as we would not use managed<->native code calls and
> the jit would allow us to get a performance close to native code.
> Thanks for attention, and please let me know if I said anything wrong.
Well, I don't see anything wrong in what you said.
In the next week i'll start to test your stuff.
Many thanks to you.
Marco Canini <firstname.lastname@example.org>