<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Open Web, Closed Databases?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://quoderat.megginson.com/2005/02/14/open-web-closed-databases/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://quoderat.megginson.com/2005/02/14/open-web-closed-databases/</link>
	<description>Open information and technology.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Dec 2011 09:40:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt Spong</title>
		<link>http://quoderat.megginson.com/2005/02/14/open-web-closed-databases/#comment-60</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Matt Spong]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Feb 2005 17:22:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=17#comment-60</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I used to have the same opinion as you, until I read an article on the subject a few weeks ago (sorry, I don&#039;t have the URL at the moment).  Basically the point the article made was that in order to be database-agnostic, you basically have to target the lowest common denomiator - nothing more than simple SQL.  Every database has its own strong points, its own unique APIs and abilities, and so on, and if you ignore these, you&#039;re not using your tools to their full potential.

It&#039;s a good point.  Why limit your application, in terms of power and especially performance, by not using your database to its fullest potential?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I used to have the same opinion as you, until I read an article on the subject a few weeks ago (sorry, I don&#8217;t have the URL at the moment).  Basically the point the article made was that in order to be database-agnostic, you basically have to target the lowest common denomiator &#8211; nothing more than simple SQL.  Every database has its own strong points, its own unique APIs and abilities, and so on, and if you ignore these, you&#8217;re not using your tools to their full potential.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s a good point.  Why limit your application, in terms of power and especially performance, by not using your database to its fullest potential?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam Fitzpatrick</title>
		<link>http://quoderat.megginson.com/2005/02/14/open-web-closed-databases/#comment-59</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Adam Fitzpatrick]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Feb 2005 05:12:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=17#comment-59</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Another factor is that mysql is ubiquitous among the most affordable web site hosting providers (though this might raise a chicken-or-egg question). You generally need to spend a bit more money to store your data in something else, probably by paying for a dedicated or colocated server and administering the alternative DBMS yourself. So most potential users - and, quite likely, the project&#039;s developers themselves, if they don&#039;t want to host the project from their bedrooms or offices - only have access to mysql.

(Contradictory evidence in the form of listings of comparably priced web hosting providers who support postgresql would be most welcome.)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another factor is that mysql is ubiquitous among the most affordable web site hosting providers (though this might raise a chicken-or-egg question). You generally need to spend a bit more money to store your data in something else, probably by paying for a dedicated or colocated server and administering the alternative DBMS yourself. So most potential users &#8211; and, quite likely, the project&#8217;s developers themselves, if they don&#8217;t want to host the project from their bedrooms or offices &#8211; only have access to mysql.</p>
<p>(Contradictory evidence in the form of listings of comparably priced web hosting providers who support postgresql would be most welcome.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://quoderat.megginson.com/2005/02/14/open-web-closed-databases/#comment-58</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Matt]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2005 18:21:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=17#comment-58</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#039;s performance and bloat issues with the database abstraction classes out there. One we looked at was bigger than WordPress itself!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s performance and bloat issues with the database abstraction classes out there. One we looked at was bigger than WordPress itself!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dominic Mitchell</title>
		<link>http://quoderat.megginson.com/2005/02/14/open-web-closed-databases/#comment-57</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dominic Mitchell]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2005 13:49:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=17#comment-57</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hear Hear!  I&#039;m quite distressed at having to install an &lt;a href=&quot;http://wordpress-pg.sourceforge.net/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;an entirely different project&lt;/a&gt; just to get wordpress working with my database.  And by the sound of things, WP 1.5 won&#039;t be any better.  :-(]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hear Hear!  I&#8217;m quite distressed at having to install an <a href="http://wordpress-pg.sourceforge.net/" rel="nofollow">an entirely different project</a> just to get wordpress working with my database.  And by the sound of things, WP 1.5 won&#8217;t be any better.  <img src='http://s0.wp.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif' alt=':-(' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mik</title>
		<link>http://quoderat.megginson.com/2005/02/14/open-web-closed-databases/#comment-56</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mik]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2005 13:39:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=17#comment-56</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There is a DBI type of module in PEAR called PEAR::DB (a possibly more original name than DBI :-)) that does just that. The comany I work in has a web app in PHP written with this, developed against MySQL and deployed in MS SQL Server and Oracle without much problems. You can find it at http://pear.php.net/package/DB.
I guess most PHP developers just don&#039;t care enough to use it. It requires a certain discipline to stay in the standard SQl specs.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is a DBI type of module in PEAR called PEAR::DB (a possibly more original name than DBI <img src='http://s0.wp.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> ) that does just that. The comany I work in has a web app in PHP written with this, developed against MySQL and deployed in MS SQL Server and Oracle without much problems. You can find it at <a href="http://pear.php.net/package/DB" rel="nofollow">http://pear.php.net/package/DB</a>.<br />
I guess most PHP developers just don&#8217;t care enough to use it. It requires a certain discipline to stay in the standard SQl specs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

