Hi Karl,
kfogel@collab.net wrote:
> <stevec@atomic9.net> writes:
>
>>Would it be worth it for Subversion to use PostgreSQL instead of the Berkely
>>DB (where/when it is used) since PostgreSQL is now at v8.0?
>
>
> Don't be fooled -- they're both called "databases", but the
> resemblance ends there. Berkeley and PostgreSQL are completely
> different animals. PostgreSQL is accessed through SQL, Berkely is
> not. This would be a major change to the Subversion repository code.
But if Subversion supported PostgreSQL it wouldn't too difficult
to support several other SQL databases, like Firebird, Ingres,
MySQL, or Cloudscape. That could expand SVN adoption significantly.
I was intrigued by a comment made yesterday by Ben
Collins-Sussman that the entire interface to the repository is
essentially specified in a single svn_fs.h file (not sure if
that's the right name). If that is the case, support for SQL
databases would be mostly a question of emulating that interface
via SQL.
Joe
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Jan 14 22:47:26 2005