Using different DB drivers for RMTxStore?

[Aki Yoshida <el...@googlemail.com>]

Hi,
My question is about whether we have a statement about which DB
drivers are supported by RMTxStore.

I saw CXF-3534 that complains the 2.4.0 version of RMTxStore no longer
works for the Oracle driver because of the change in one of the SQL
types used in the table definition.

The previous version seems to have worked fine with the Oracle driver.
In fact, it was probably once intended to also work with the Oracle
driver because there is a method catching explicitly one of the Oracle
specific driver exceptions.

How should we do with this ticket? I can think of several options.

1. Do nothing and say that anyone using a driver other than derby
should write their own RMTxStore implementation.

2. Change the SQL type of those affected fields from BIGINT to
DECIMAL(19,0) so that we can support both derby and oracle (and
possibly a few more) using the current RMTxStore code.

3. Provide a set of DB table schema versions specifically for the
drivers so that several other DB drivers can be additionally supported
(e.g. MSSQL).

My feeling is tending towards 1 or 2 for now. In the future, we could
consider supporting some other drivers out of the box if there is
enough demand.

Your feedback is appreciated.

Thanks.
Regards, aki

Re: Using different DB drivers for RMTxStore?

[Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>]

I would lean toward #2 at this point.   Out of the box, I'd like to see it 
working with as many DB's as possible and using the wider supported types 
makes sense for that.    Longer term, a combo of #1 and #3 makes sense with 
possible a couple variations of RMTxStore with different DB table schemas 
provided to make it easier to setup.

Dan


On Thursday, May 26, 2011 9:12:28 AM Aki Yoshida wrote:
> Hi,
> My question is about whether we have a statement about which DB
> drivers are supported by RMTxStore.
> 
> I saw CXF-3534 that complains the 2.4.0 version of RMTxStore no longer
> works for the Oracle driver because of the change in one of the SQL
> types used in the table definition.
> 
> The previous version seems to have worked fine with the Oracle driver.
> In fact, it was probably once intended to also work with the Oracle
> driver because there is a method catching explicitly one of the Oracle
> specific driver exceptions.
> 
> How should we do with this ticket? I can think of several options.
> 
> 1. Do nothing and say that anyone using a driver other than derby
> should write their own RMTxStore implementation.
> 
> 2. Change the SQL type of those affected fields from BIGINT to
> DECIMAL(19,0) so that we can support both derby and oracle (and
> possibly a few more) using the current RMTxStore code.
> 
> 3. Provide a set of DB table schema versions specifically for the
> drivers so that several other DB drivers can be additionally supported
> (e.g. MSSQL).
> 
> My feeling is tending towards 1 or 2 for now. In the future, we could
> consider supporting some other drivers out of the box if there is
> enough demand.
> 
> Your feedback is appreciated.
> 
> Thanks.
> Regards, aki

-- 
Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org
http://dankulp.com/blog
Talend - http://www.talend.com