GLPI on a different DBMS

BrainSCAN · 2009-05-13 11:08:40

Hello.

There have been MANY posts asking for GLPI to use a DB different to MySQL. It's clear that there's interest on using GLPI with PostgreSQL, Oracle, MS SQL, etc.

It doesn't mean that MySQL is a bad choice, but each one has its own reason to use a different DBMS.

In fact, there has been a serious support to use PEAR MDB2 as an abstraction layer so that with only one development in GLPI, each user will be able to select with which DBMS he wants GLPI to work:
https://mail.gna.org/public/glpi-dev/20 … 00007.html
https://mail.gna.org/public/glpi-dev/20 … 00002.html

So my question is, aren't you (the developers of GLPI, who make a great work) interested in receiving support to make GLPI database independent?

If you're interested on this support, we could talk about it and enhance GLPI :-)

If not, please explain why don't you want GLPI to work with a different DBMS other than MySQL, because I wouldn't understand it at first.

Thanks.

remi · 2009-05-13 11:24:14

> If not, please explain why don't you want GLPI to work with a different DBMS other than MySQL, because I wouldn't understand it at first.

It's not a problem of interest but of "ressource".
This is really a big work.

+

BrainSCAN · 2009-05-13 13:03:40

Probably I (my company) can give the enough (human) resources to make GLPI use a library to so it becomes DBMS independent.

If so, how could we cooperate?

JMD · 2009-05-13 23:58:19

It's not only a problem of resources but also a problem of priority. This is not actually our priority (cf roadmap).

Using abstraction layer implies to :

- Assume the perf cost of the abstraction layer

- Be slave of the choosen lib

- Assume support for every DB

etc...

remi · 2009-05-14 07:30:59

And using a PEAR extension will make GLPI installation really more difficult...

+

BrainSCAN · 2009-05-15 08:33:31

Ok, I know that the work isn't easy, but sooner or later it's a fact that will need an answer, and if you postpone this it will become more and more difficult, don't you think?

And if you don't like the PEAR solution, which one do you prefer?

JMD · 2009-05-15 12:59:48

Humm, we give you an answer about that : it's in the roadmap for the 1.0 version of GLPI.

About the fact , that it would be more and more difficult if we postpone this, i don't agree. We preferred to stabilize the GLPI features, clean, rebuild the GLPI'sframework before adding this deep feature.

We have nothing against Pear solution, each lib must be evaluated strongly and seriously to do a good choice.

Don't forget that when we do a choice for GLPI, we must assume this choice for a long period to our users.

Forum GLPI-Project

Announcement

#1 2009-05-13 11:08:40

GLPI on a different DBMS

#2 2009-05-13 11:24:14

Re: GLPI on a different DBMS

#3 2009-05-13 13:03:40

Re: GLPI on a different DBMS

#4 2009-05-13 23:58:19

Re: GLPI on a different DBMS

#5 2009-05-14 07:30:59

Re: GLPI on a different DBMS

#6 2009-05-15 08:33:31

Re: GLPI on a different DBMS

#7 2009-05-15 12:59:48

Re: GLPI on a different DBMS

Board footer