Using DBI

Jonathan Schatz jon at
Fri Jan 17 19:01:19 UTC 2003

On Fri, 2003-01-17 at 06:12, Bradley Baetz wrote:
> A quick summary:
> - Don't use SendSQL (or {Push,Pop}GlobalSQLState/MoreSQLData/etc. They
> won't work w/o SendSQL anyway)
> - Use the DBI helper functions. They're easier to write, clearer to
> understand, and some of them are written in XS (ie C) which makes them
> faster. (Postgres doesn't use the C version, and you must have compiled
> your DBD:: driver _after_ installing the updated DBI for the C version
> to be used)

does there exist the possibility of keeping the old *SQL functions
working by changing them to use DBI? i didn't know this was coming, and
you've magically added an extra week's worth of work to my current

i'd write this if there is any interest. i personally find DBI to be
extremely ugly and generally write wrapper classes around it. in fact, i
don't think i've ever (professionally) used DBI without some kind of
abstraction level.

while i agree that the bugzilla sql subs were ugly, i'm seriously
dreading a rewrite of the code i've got. is anyone else in this same

Jonathan Schatz
Engineering System Administrator
VMware, Inc
"Te occidere possunt sed te edere non possunt nefas est."

More information about the developers mailing list