Re: apr_dbd vs. direct sqlite (was Re: searchable revprops?)

On Tue, 15 May 2007, Eric Gillespie wrote:

> "Garrett Rooney" <rooneg@electricjellyfish.net> writes:
...
> > many of the problems with swapping new db back ends in (i.e. sql
> > dialect differences), so I'd recommend sticking with raw sqlite unless
> > there's a pressing reason not to do so.
>
> Dan Berlin assured me that svn uses a narrow subset of SQL, and
> should work with any back-end.

Not a whole lot has changed in our SQL usage since DannyB's initial
implementation -- porting to a new SQL-compatible backend should be a
matter of changing no more than 1 SQL statement.

While I don't really think it's necessary, in terms of moving to
apr_bdb or an alternate abstraction in a later release, there should
be no problem, as we aren't currently exposing sqlite as part of our
public API.