Up Prev Next
From: Tom Poindexter <poindexter dot tom at tci dot com>
Subject: Re: Unix/MS SQL Server connectivity
Date: May 29 1998 11:19PM
On Fri, May 29, 1998 at 03:51:01PM -0700, Michael Peppler wrote:
> How many DBlibrary apps are there still out there? Sybase wouldb't get
> a way with deciding that SQL Server 11.xyz (or 12.x) will not work at
> all with DBlibrary (of course Sybase doesn't have MS's clout :-)
> > Redbrick: up to 5.x Sybase's DB-Lib through an open server
> > 5.0.12 DB-Lib and native ODBC (even on Unix), warning
> > that DB-Lib going away
> > 5.0.15 DB-Lib gone, only ODBC
> Meaning that the server was capable of understanding multiple
> protocols (TDS for DBlibrary, and something else for the native ODBC
> stuff). I don't know if MS-SQL 6.x works the same way. If it does (ie
I've only started working with RedBrick at 5.0.x, so I don't know all of
its history. Up to 5.0.12, RedBrick licensed Sybase's Open Server code
for it's interface (gee, just like Sybase alway touted :) The Open Server ran
as a separate process. RB now has a native ODBC interface, which runs
as another process. Each in turn connects to the database server using (?,
pipes, shared mem, whatever?)
I have no idea how MS-SQL server works.
> But I still think that dropping backwards compatibility is a stupid
> thing to do...
Agreed. And that's my point also. I think Sybase would be stupid to
completely drop DB-Lib. And I also gave hell to the RB sales folks
about dropping the Open Server/DB-Lib interface.
Concerning Microsoft: they would be unwise (at least in the eyes of us
techies) to drop DB-Lib support. However, MS has more of a track record
of "upgrade or risk falling behind".