[development] db_rewrite_sql

[Bâshrat the Sneaky]

I *knew* I was going to get that reply :P

What I'm talking about is some sort of "lower level" query builder.
Lower level in the sense that you can write pseudo-SQL, and don't have
to rely on the limitations of an UI: you cannot specify specific
columns to be selected for example.

I hope you understand my point now, though it may be completely
invalid... sorry for the offtopic in that case.

On 4/23/07, Victor Kane <victorkane at gmail.com> wrote:
> views is the drupal query builder :)
>
>
> On 4/23/07, Wim Leers <bashratthesneaky at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I think it's inevitable for a project as modular as Drupal and with
> > the amount of modules Drupal has, to eventually need a built-in query
> > builder, to keep things maintainable and/or to lift the project to
> > "the next level". The question is though, how doable is this? And are
> > enough people willing to work on it? My knowledge about query
> > builders and SQL is too limited, but I imagine that you can't write
> > this in 2 weeks with say, 10 developers working on it. Something like
> > this needs time, a lot of time.
> >
> > Not to mention we also have to somehow provide enough context
> > information for other modules to hook in whenever desired.
> >
> > If it's implemented extremely well, we could simply *always* write
> > "Drupal SQL", and let the query builder worry about the specific SQL
> > (MySQL, PostgreSQL, Oracle, etc.). That would rock! But what would
> > the performance implications be? I think that a complete query
> > builder in Drupal core might slow down things too much? Or something
> > like the Boost module would have to get in core, to balance the
> > performance again (virtually no load for anonymous visitors)?
> >
> > Just some thoughts...
> >
> > Wim Leers
> >
> > On Apr 23, 2007, at 11:42 , jp.stacey at torchbox.com wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > >>> My opinion on that all depends on what you mean by a query builder.
> > >>> :-)   Could you elucidate?
> > >> along the lines of how views does it.
> > >
> > > I'd envisage any query builder would be more heavily tied to the
> > > structure of the underlying database than views.
> > >
> > > Rather than adding extra node-based or categories-based options, you'd
> > > explicitly add extra database tables by name, and specify quasi-SQL
> > > JOIN
> > > conditions and WHERE filtering. At the end of it all it could spit out
> > > some fairly vanilla SQL that matched the structure you'd set up.
> > > Does that
> > > sound right?
> > >
> > > (Of course, query builders aren't great at actually optimising the
> > > SQL.)
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > J-P
> >
> >
>
>


-- 
sneakyBlog - http://wim.arkanasoft.com