Re: Firebird doesn't support MSVC 2015

Having spent some more time using SQLite recent I don't think it would be a bad choice for the 
default embedded DB. Yes it lacks type checking, but it's well tested, seems to be easier to build, 
and is much more widely used.

The reason we wanted a new DB was to allow using Base without the Java dependency, i.e. to allow 
more people to try Base easily. The reason we went for firebird instead of SQLite was the lack of 
type checking/dynamic type system that SQLite has. In hindsight I feel like this isn't actually a 
huge issue for the average user who probably just wants to build something simple in Base. (A bunch 
of well known of real life applications rely on SQLite without issues.)

Note: if someone is truly concerned about the underlying database I suspect they should be running 
their own external DB, which lets them choose from a large number of DBs (I'm not a base expert 
though, don't quote me on this...). All we're doing here is setting the default DB when you create 
a .odb work an embedded DB.

One issue that would need investigating is forwards compatibility - which I discovered potentially 
doesn't exist between eg SQLite 3.8 and 3.6. So maybe this isn't actually a good solution either, 
unless we'd stick to one version of SQLite across LO versions.

- Andrzej

On 3 March 2016 09:53:40 GMT-08:00, Jonathan Aquilina <eagles051387@gmail.com> wrote:
> Instead of reinventing the wheel why not look at SQLite or there is a
> nosql
> db couchdb as well but not sure how easy that would be to integrate
> with LO
>
> This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast.
> www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
> <#DDB4FAA8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> Jonathan Aquilina
>
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 6:50 PM, Wols Lists <antlists@youngman.org.uk>
> wrote:
>
> > On 02/03/16 12:12, Noel Grandin wrote:
> > > On 2016/03/02 2:11 PM, Michael Stahl wrote:
> > > > personally i'd be inclined towards alternatives that are less
> likely to
> > > > trigger toolchain problems - maybe there's a SQL database
> implemented
> > > > in, say, Java somewhere...
> > >
> > > Maybe even one that shares a committer with LO ?
> > :-)
> >
> > Sounds like I ought to get my finger out :-)
> >
> > I want to write a NoSQL database (a Pick derivative) and the plan is
> to
> > do it and make it part of LibreOffice. Problem is, as a carer, I find
> it
> > very hard to get the time available to concentrate, and I also don't
> > have all the skills I need.
> >
> > Anyways, I will try and have a crack at it - life seems to be getting
> a
> > bit easier at the moment - and see where it takes us.
> >
> > For those who know me, I am very much anti relational practice - imho
> > it's impossible to write an efficient truly relational database - the
> > theory has technical flaws that seriously impact any FNF engine.
> > Basically, that (in contravention of Einstein's dictum) the engine is
> > *too* *simple*, which means that any applications *must* be *overly*
> > *complex*. I'll wax lyrical if you like but you'd be wise not to get
> me
> > started :-)
> >
> > My main problem is that a Pick database is actually a complete
> operating
> > environment. Fundamental to its operation is its language, called
> > DATABASIC, and while I could probably write the database engine
> without
> > too much difficulty, writing the language compiler is a step too far
> at
> > the moment.
> >
> > Anyways, here's to having a go - if anyone's mad enough to join me,
> great!
> > Cheers,
> > Wol
> > _______________________________________________
> > LibreOffice mailing list
> > LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
> > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> LibreOffice mailing list
> LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice