[Fwd: Re: [DB-SIG] Abstraction layer confusion, ULA (was Re: Database Abstraction in Python)]

Jonathan Franz jfranz at neurokode.com
Mon Apr 18 16:40:26 CEST 2005

> Isn't this the same split that Perl has with it's DBI:DBD?

Yes, and the same sort of split is used by ADO, deplhi, Ruby DBI and 

> So in the interests of spurring action, what other parts of the DB-API need
> revision? Let's make a concrete list, then this can actually move forward. 
> Lets put aside all higher-level APIs for the moment - I think that this is 
> better handled in a different PEP. 

A different PEP was the idea - but we will need to keep in mind what, if 
any, changes to the driver layer would be needed to support functions we 
might want.

Heres my list of dbapi changes (adds to yours):

- parameter marks (choose 1 or two, get rid of others)
- round-trip typing (or hooks to allow it at the ULA, including type 
- better definition of all return types (undefined shouldn't be allowed, 
  either it is defined, or it returns nothing - leaving it to the module 
  only induces confusion) (extends execute return values in your list)
- datetime removal (use python datetime types)
- better documentation (descriptor fields are poorly defined, and are 
based upon odbc fields, yet the docs don't define them, or point at the 
odbc docs)

> Off the top of my head:
>    connection paramaters
>    execute return values
>    binding input variables

More information about the DB-SIG mailing list