unfortunately i tried mdb and it was totally unusable and badly documented, and to port pear db over to mdb was impossible, i find pear db ok, even adodb is cool, i had to build my own class specifically just for mysql with pretty good performance as no others could.
Actually it had just as much documentation as PEAR DB since a while (I will update the MDB docs with DB updates soon .. just as I will port over the improvements made to DB). Its just that MDB can do way more than DB and yes all of those advanced features havent been documented.
I am not sure what you mean with "unuseable". Care to enlighten me?
Anyways yes I guess in alot of ways I have been somewhat foolish in this entire process. Since I did MDB few people helped me even though alot of people wanted all the nice Metabase features. At the same time I keep helping out in DB, posting patches etc. So essentially its a one way direction. I feed DB, but DB doesnt feed MDB (so I have to watch thr CVS commits to figure out if I should apply the same thing to MDB).
So in the end it seems to me that I was a bit blind sided as to what people really wanted in PEAR. Appearently they prefer to stay with DB, adding things here and there to try to add the missing features. While at the same time ignoring the fact that this will make DB even slower as it is today (yes MDB is faster than DB, MDB2 even more so .. but that is another myth I was unable to combat).
Well either way MDB has worked nicely for me and a few people (and will get continued support) and MDB2 works even better for me. So the effort was worth it. Just kinda annoyign getting FUD like this spread across multiple MLs.
regards, Lukas Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________ BackendMedia www.backendmedia.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linn Zwoch Smith GbR Pariser Str. 44 D-10707 Berlin
Tel +49 30 83 22 50 00 Fax +49 30 83 22 50 07
-- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
