Home Original page

Python and ODBC?

Ryujin ryu-jin at bigfoot.com
Mon Jan 15 11:35:49 EST 2001 
In article <93upsf02pvl at news1.newsguy.com>, "Alex Martelli"
<aleaxit at yahoo.com> wrote:


thx for your help

matte
> "Ryujin" <ryu-jin at bigfoot.com> wrote in message
> news:93tfo0$12p$1 at ryu.it...
>> Which is the best solution to work with python and a SQL database under
> Windows?
> 
> So much depends on what _scale_ you need to work...!  Multi-user, or
> single?  Do you need transactions, stored procedures/triggers, etc? Even
> typical database size is a factor.
> 
> For really small-scale needs, for example, Gadfly has interesting
> characteristics -- you might want to look into it -- but it is not
> designed to scale up to intensive multi-user accesses or really huge
> databases.
> 
> So, hard to give a 100% answer, but, if you're Windows-only, you might
> want to try MSDE, the freely-redistributable version of SQL Server
> (shorn of the various graphical front-ends &c); you can download and
> use/redistribute it freely if you have a license for Microsoft Studio or
> Office Developer.  It scales well up to 5 simultaneous users, and has
> all the trimmings you'd expect from a professional RDBMS, such as
> transactions, stored-procedures, etc, etc.  If you don't care about
> redistribution, you can also download and use (but not redistribute) SQL
> Server Developer Edition, which is the same thing plus the graphical
> aids for DB administration/development/debugging.
> 
> It does have an upper boundary of 2 gigabytes per database -- which was
> not a problem for us, but might be in other applications.
> 
> I have not tried out the versions of those related to SQL Server 2000,
> only the ones related to SQL Server 7 (the previous release), which were
> still around for download on the MS site a couple months ago
> (sorry, don't have the URL and don't know if they're still there, as
> I found out the same bits also were on our MSDN Universal subscription
> CDROM's, so I saved downloading the big packs) -- in any case, I have no
> reason to doubt that SQL Server 2000 is at least as good (but I only did
> a few tests on that myself, and not on the MSDE-equivalents).
> 
>> I mean which module do I have to install on Python 2.0?
> 
> That's part of what I like re MSDE -- you can talk to it directly from
> Python via ADO and ADOX (the client-side parts of the MSDAC, which is
> also freely downloadable/redistributable), and that turns out to be VERY
> fast as well as quite convenient.  It may be more so in our case since
> we don't _only_ use Python to talk to those DB's; ADO/ADOX can be
> accessed equally well from a great variety of programming/scripting
> languages.
> 
> Really, the only serious downside I can see is the very strong Microsoft
> lock-in that is implicit in all of this.  Since our app was
> MS-platforms-only anyway for another variety of reason, I chose MSDE
> with a perfectly clear conscience.  If I had to avoid platform lock-ins,
> and still get transactions and stored procedures
> (each of those being a real 'must' for us), then, I dunno -- maybe
> Interbase, now open-source, has those, but I don't really know much
> about it; maybe Postgres (again, no first-hand experience).
> 
> 
>> What about under Linux? I'm trying to install mxODBC module with MySQL
>> db on a Linuxppc box.
> 
> I'll pass on this one, having no experience with MySQL (I don't even
> know if it supports transactions and stored procedures!).  I do know
> it's very popular, so I guess one can't go TOO far wrong with it.
> 
> 
> Alex
> 
> 
> 


-- 
---------------------------------------
Memelli Matteo					
Could u imagine a world without Windoz?	 
ryu-jin at bigfoot.com			 
---------------------------------------
More information about the Python-list mailing list