[wp-hackers] Google SoC: PostgreSQL port
davec at postgresintl.com
Fri Mar 23 11:40:34 GMT 2007
On 23-Mar-07, at 7:22 AM, Olexandr Melnyk wrote:
> 2007/3/23, Computer Guru <computerguru at neosmart.net>:
>> Yep, David and I are working on the port.. It's mostly done, there
>> just a couple of kinks that need sorting out here and there.
> Glad to hear that the port is near completion. What especially
> needs to be
> done? Is there a way for me to contribute to the project?
As Matt said, this isn't the solution. The solution is to make
wordpress database agnostic. Now that is a job worthy of tackling for
the google SOC.
Either way the one thing we haven't solved is replacing
mysql_count_rows. Which I suspect can be done by simply doing select
> 2007/3/23, Matt <speedboxer at gmail.com>:
>> A better project would be to make WP be multi-database compatible.
>> even make it more extendable so other people would be able to make
>> DB ports be simply making up a file.
> Agreed on this. Although I understand that's its hard to add and keep
> cross-database compatibility in case
> application uses some of the advanced database-specific features, it
> shouldn't be the case for WordPress. Most of the MySQL-isms could be
> rewritten using the standard syntax, not shortening the list of
> features that can be used. An exception from this rule are the queries
> that need to get a certain part of result rows,
> what is incosistent across
> databases. In MySQL, one can use both "LIMIT a, b" and "LIMIT b OFFSET
> a" syntaxes. By changing queries to use the second way would add
> PostgreSQL compatibility, without loosing any features. However, in
> order to support other databases, some abstration function would have
> to be written.
> It would be nice if the common (the one that will work on
> PostgreSQL, but
> won't stop it working on
> MySQL) changes from PostgreSQL port could be applied to the main
> source tree.
> Talking of SoC, I have another database-related idea. What I'd like
> to do is
> to add support for sharing the same set of tables by many blogs in
> MU. So far, point of view on this approach has been the main
> between WordPress MU and Lyceum. While Lyceum developers choose to
> every query to implement this, I am suggesting to do it on database
> That way we would get benefits of both approaches:
> 1) keeping the changes in WordPress source code minimal;
> 2) make it have a good scalability;
> 3) comfortable to manage, no need to run a query on each user's table
> to add an extra field;
> 4) support WordPress plugins with no, or almost no, changes;
> As a downside, I can mention that in order to implement this,
> triggers and
> views would have to be used, thus, it would need at least MySQL 5.0 in
> order to run. But, I don't think that this is a problem as most of the
> blog hosting services would run on dedicated servers, where service
> owners can install whatever MySQL version they prefer. And also, we
> can keep this as an option, leaving the choice of approach to be used
> to the end user.
> What do you think?
> Olexandr Melnyk
> wp-hackers mailing list
> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
More information about the wp-hackers