[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
... and because MS put in non-standard SQL 'extensions' to lock you in.
On 12 Mar 2012 21:20, "Simon Waters" <simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 12/03/12 15:31, Gordon Henderson wrote:
>
> Give us some idea of what you're actually trying to do. If it's someting
> running on the server itself, (or even an application running elsewhere
> designed to talk to mysql), then it doesn't need odbc as it can just
> talk native sql directly to the server...
I just used the ODBC driver for MySQL (for Windows), the reason was we
had code working with MSSQL using ODBC, and this avoided rewriting too
much. Although it did reveal MySQL trails MSSQL in various ways, and is
a lot pickier about the SQL syntax (which is probably a good thing).
So I guess I'm saying even if you are doing a drop-in replacement for
another database connected via ODBC it still need "porting", which I
guess means ODBC failed in its stated aim, and it failed because it
allows too much flexibility rather than strictly mandating permitted SQL
syntax and functionality.
--
The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG
http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list
FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq
-- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq