
pat at netburp
Jan 15, 2003, 11:19 PM
Post #19 of 42
(3534 views)
Permalink
|
Uhhhh....what? I don't *thinik* there's a question of moving the data out of mysql or *A* database anyway , I think the debate has been... a) should the backend provide an interface to the database or b) should the frontend connect to the database directly Security wise, a makes more sense, but how secure do you want your recordings of M*A*S*H to be??? In most situations all connections would be behind a firewall hopefully, and connecting to the db directly, and even through an api would be less costly than asking for the info through the backend. Personally, I don't care who knows that I record junkyard wars, but ymmv. ;-) Pat Joseph Stump wrote: > New to the list, but I thought I should chime in. MySQL is a well > known DB, which allows, if nothing else, widespread addon/module > development. For instance, once I have my MythTV box up and running I > plan on writing a WAP module in PHP/MySQL because I'm sure I can > figure out the table structure, etc. > > IMO MySQL is rather simple to set up - more so than most. Yes it would > be easier to embed it into the backend, but you would end up hindering > innovation in the end because the standard/files wouldn't be as open > and widely understood. > > --Joe > > > On Thursday, January 16, 2003, at 12:29 AM, James Sleeman wrote: > >> Bruce Markey wrote: >> >>> James Sleeman wrote: >>> >>>> I think that Stephan has a point. I find applications that require >>>> mySQL to be installed and create database/tables etc are a pain - >>>> namely because it's generally not necessary for the software to >>>> have such a hefty (even if mySQL isn't exactly hefty) requirement, >>>> it adds to the complexity for the system needlessly in most instances. >>> >>> >>> >>> But not all instances, agreed? In this case, there are 1000's >>> shows with multiple fields of information, lists of recordings, >>> lists of titles to search for to be recorded, etc. >> >> >> True yes, not in all cases. >> >>> Without a >>> database, the data would need to be stored in flat files and >>> you'd need to parse, error check, lock while writing... Oh, >>> write a new database. That would defiantly be a pain and >>> add complexity. >> >> >> Obviously a (capable) database is required, and it is not an >> efficient use of developer time to reinvent the database, hence my >> suggestion of a lightweight embeddable database as a default engine >> (eg SQLite as I noted, which I think would be quite capable of >> handling the data requirements of mythtv, easily so) which gives you >> most of the benefits of a big engine such as mySQL without the setup >> & administration & overhead. >> >>> the choice of mySQL was because it is ubiquitous. >> >> >> Only if you have need for an RDBMS, if you don't then why should myth >> require it be installed when a lightweight embedded solution may be >> better suited to the application. >> >>>> To put it simply, I think the frontend should only have to know how >>>> to contact the backend, and that's all - everything it needs >>>> (video, program listings etc) it asks the backend to provide to it. >>> >>> >>> >>> To what end? What problem are we trying to solve? The >> >> >> Abstraction -- PostGres != mySQL != MSSQL != jetSQL etc, there are >> minor (and major) differences between these systems, by abstracting >> the DBMS connectivity to an extendable class it means that the >> proliferation of SQL and exceptions to SQL is limited to within that >> one class. >> >> Simplification -- The less connections between frontend and backend, >> the simpler it becomes, for developers and users alike. Ask yourself >> this, if you were the frontend, why should you care about the >> database driving all this, all you care about is what the backend >> tells you and what you tell the backend. >> With multiple developers it becomes even more so, if a developer >> working on the backend comes up with some new stuff in the database >> engine (whatever that shall be) he shouldn't have to describe all >> these low level details to front end developers wanting to use this >> information, they should just say to the backend - "Hey, I want this >> information" and the backend gives it to them after doing "things" to >> the database, if another developer comes along developing something >> else, they can also just ask the backend for the information, less >> duplication of code, less places for things to go wrong. >> >>> The frontend can make the query (from the same library code) and cut >>> out the middleman. >> >> >> Yep, and I can go and milk a cow if I like and I cut out the milker, >> truck driver, milk processing company, bottlers, and milk man - but >> I'd much rather not know how my milk gets to me, all I care is I give >> money to the milk man and he gives me milk all nice and ready to >> drink. If I'm, the front end, I could find out what database we're >> using, open a connection to it, select from the right table, being >> careful to make the select correct, etc etc but I'd much rather not >> know the gory details, I'd prefer to just ask a backend - >> backend.getListOfShows(channel, from, to), or >> backend.deleteThisShow(showID) or backend.recordThisShow(showID) or >> backend.streamMeShow(showID) you get the idea. >> >> --- >> James Sleeman >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mythtv-dev mailing list >> mythtv-dev[at]snowman.net >> http://www.snowman.net/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-dev >> >> >> > -- > Joe Stump - joe[at]joestump.net > http://www.jerum.com > "Software never has bugs. It just develops random features." > > _______________________________________________ > mythtv-dev mailing list > mythtv-dev[at]snowman.net > http://www.snowman.net/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-dev
|