Mailing-List: contact torque-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Apache Torque Developers List" <torque-dev@db.apache.org>
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 23:19:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: Thomas Fischer <tfischer@apache.org>
To: Apache Torque Developers List <torque-dev@db.apache.org>, hps@intermeta.de
Subject: Village usage [Was: Re: CfV: Start release Cycle for Torque 3.2]
In-Reply-To: <darunm$hf0$1@tangens.hometree.net>
Message-ID: <20050710225655.L5228@minotaur.apache.org>
References: <20050710003511.K84959@minotaur.apache.org>
 <darunm$hf0$1@tangens.hometree.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed


On Sun, 10 Jul 2005, Henning P. Schmiedehausen wrote:

> Thomas Fischer <tfischer@apache.org> writes:
>
>> - replace village (and fix the village-associated bugs)
>
> I wrote something about this a long time ago and had some conversation
> with Jon Stevens about this. His opinion was basically "no, I will not
> give the code to the ASF". However, the code _is_ under ASF 1 like
> license, so a fork outside the ASF would IMHO be possible.
>
> If you are interested in this and look for a starting point; you can get
>
> http://henning.schmiedehausen.org/code/village-260.tar.gz
>
> which is a snapshot of my internal subversion tree of village. This is
> basically CVS head from share.whichever.com, cleaned up a bit and
> added a maven build. I once intended to work on this but I have a few
> new ideas which I want to intigue Thomas with @ ApacheCon. :-)
>

In my opinion, the basic question is whether we want to use village in the 
long run or whether we want to replace it. In my opinion, Torque uses very 
few features of Village, but it sees most of the restrictions. For 
example, one of the very central ideas of village, i.e. getting 
information about the database out of the metadata is useless for Torque, 
because in Torque, we already know the Structure of the database from the 
map builders. Using the metadata instead leads to problems like 
http://issues.apache.org/scarab/issues/id/TRQS285. In my opinion, Torque 
uses village just as a jdbc replacement in the moment. There might be 
things that can be done more easily in village as compared to jdbc, but 
there are not many of it. On the other side, plain jdbc is faster and more 
efficient, and one does not have any intrinsic limitations.

Some time ago, just out of curiosity, I tried to implement the doSelect() 
part with plain jdbc, and it worked surprisingly well. I stopped working 
on it to get the release ready, but I will port it to the newest CVS 
version and put it somewhere publicly.

     Thomas

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: torque-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: torque-dev-help@db.apache.org