FAQ
Hello,
for a cross-platform project, I am looking for a Python DB. It should be
lightweight, but provide transactions an of course reliable.
Is there such a thing out there?
I have read about Gadfly, is this still maintained?
Thanks,
-Patrick

Search Discussions

  • Bob Gailer at Aug 25, 2003 at 11:04 pm

    At 11:08 PM 8/25/2003 +0200, Patrick Useldinger wrote:
    Hello,
    for a cross-platform project, I am looking for a Python DB. It should be
    lightweight, but provide transactions an of course reliable.
    Is there such a thing out there?
    How cross? There's SQLite (Windows, Linux) written in C and connected via
    pysqlite. SQLite is an embedded SQL Database Engine. Very powerful, fast,
    easy. www.sqlite.org, pysqlite.sourceforge.net

    Bob Gailer
    bgailer at alum.rpi.edu
    303 442 2625

    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/attachments/20030825/c0615231/attachment.html
    -------------- next part --------------

    ---
    Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
    Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    Version: 6.0.506 / Virus Database: 303 - Release Date: 8/1/2003
  • Andy Todd at Aug 26, 2003 at 9:10 am

    Patrick Useldinger wrote:
    Hello,
    for a cross-platform project, I am looking for a Python DB. It should be
    lightweight, but provide transactions an of course reliable.
    Is there such a thing out there?
    I have read about Gadfly, is this still maintained?
    Thanks,
    -Patrick
    Gadfly is lightweight but doesn't support transactions. It is in low
    maintenance mode, development is currently not active but the project is
    hosted at SourceForge (http://sourceforge.net/projects/gadfly) and any
    bug reports and (especially) patches would be more than welcome.

    Regards,
    Andy
    --
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From the desk of Andrew J Todd esq - http://www.halfcooked.com/
  • Paul D. Fernhout at Aug 26, 2003 at 8:17 pm
    Patrick-

    You might try out the Pointrel Data Repository System I wrote -- it's
    all in Python.
    http://sourceforge.net/projects/pointrel/

    You need to learn to frame the data storage problem in its terms (triads
    or somewhat Entity-Relation-al, similar in some ways to RDF). It does
    provide single-user transactions using a lock file, but this lock file
    approach has not been tested on lots of platforms. Compared to other
    systems, you might find it less efficient in disk use (it now supports
    64 bit offsets) and more difficult to delete thigns (the short answer
    is, you can't delete anything -- without writing application level
    support on top of it). On the plus side, you only need to add one
    Python file to your project.

    However, it does not yet have the level of testing yet one might want
    for something mission critical. Naturally, how well suported it is is a
    matter of chicken and egg -- if it is not well supported people won't
    try it or improve it (until it magically makes it over some level of
    general interest). For an example of its current bleeding edge state, I
    just discovered what I think may be a potential bug where abandoned
    transactions could create problems if you are using caching (the cache
    could hold onto no longer valid handles for added new strings) -- I've
    patched that for the next release (and you can always just turn off
    caching), but that's the sort of bleeding edge thing you might encounter
    if you try it. You can see the recent announcement of the latest version
    in comp.lang.python.announce.
    http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&th=6de75a999a0ca969&rnum=3
    Or this recent post:
    http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=3f482037_5%40corp.newsgroups.com&rnum=5

    I can say that I'd be interested in making the Pointrel Data Repository
    a stable and well supported popular platform, although I won't commit to
    any specific time frame or level of effort for it. I think it would be
    more ready to go when or if I make the transition to using it to store
    all my email (gulp -- that's commitment! :-) But that hasn't happened
    yet. I'm thinking of using it in a web proxy first as that's a little
    more forgiving application area for me (but the issues of making a good
    proxy are stalling that some).

    A year or two or so back I looked at the Gadfly source with a notion of
    using some of it to put a SQL front end onto Pointrel. Maybe that would
    make it more apalatable for general use? But I'm not generally
    interested in using SQL, so I'm not sure how far down that road I want
    to go.

    In any case, all the best. And the databases written in C might be worth
    your exploration -- some of the appear to be quite good and fairly cross
    platform in their own terms.

    --Paul Fernhout

    Patrick Useldinger wrote:
    Hello,
    for a cross-platform project, I am looking for a Python DB. It should be
    lightweight, but provide transactions an of course reliable.
    Is there such a thing out there?
    I have read about Gadfly, is this still maintained?
    Thanks,
    -Patrick


    -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
    -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
  • Aaron Watters at Aug 27, 2003 at 1:56 am
    Andy Todd <andy47 at halfcooked.com> wrote in message news:<mailman.1061889235.29240.python-list at python.org>...
    Patrick Useldinger wrote:>
    Gadfly is lightweight but doesn't support transactions. It is in low
    maintenance mode, development is currently not active but the project is
    hosted at SourceForge (http://sourceforge.net/projects/gadfly) and any
    bug reports and (especially) patches would be more than welcome.
    Um.. doesn't support transactions? It depends what you mean,
    I guess. It supports transaction commit and rollback and recovery
    but not transaction concurrency... (yet)

    -- Aaron Watters

    ===
    She's wondering what he'll make for breakfast...
    He's wondering how long he has to cuddle before he can go home...
  • Gerhard Häring at Aug 27, 2003 at 6:40 am

    Aaron Watters wrote:
    Andy Todd <andy47 at halfcooked.com> wrote in message news:<mailman.1061889235.29240.python-list at python.org>...
    Patrick Useldinger wrote:>
    Gadfly is lightweight but doesn't support transactions. It is in low
    maintenance mode, development is currently not active but the project is
    hosted at SourceForge (http://sourceforge.net/projects/gadfly) and any
    bug reports and (especially) patches would be more than welcome.
    Um.. doesn't support transactions? It depends what you mean,
    I guess. It supports transaction commit and rollback and recovery
    but not transaction concurrency... (yet)
    Neither does SQLite. Only one transaction can be active at any time.
    Another transaction will block at BEGIN.

    If you need that I'd suggest you switch to a client-server database like
    PostgreSQL.

    -- Gerhard
  • David Rushby at Aug 27, 2003 at 2:34 pm
    Gerhard H?ring <gh at ghaering.de> wrote in message news:<mailman.1061966520.22920.python-list at python.org>...
    Aaron Watters wrote:
    Andy Todd <andy47 at halfcooked.com> wrote in message news:<mailman.1061889235.29240.python-list at python.org>...
    Patrick Useldinger wrote:>
    Gadfly is lightweight but doesn't support transactions. It is in low
    maintenance mode, development is currently not active but the project is
    hosted at SourceForge (http://sourceforge.net/projects/gadfly) and any
    bug reports and (especially) patches would be more than welcome.
    Um.. doesn't support transactions? It depends what you mean,
    I guess. It supports transaction commit and rollback and recovery
    but not transaction concurrency... (yet)
    Neither does SQLite. Only one transaction can be active at any time.
    Another transaction will block at BEGIN.

    If you need that I'd suggest you switch to a client-server database like
    PostgreSQL.
    No need to go client/server. Embedded Firebird supports concurrent
    transactions with configurable isolation levels, foreign keys, views,
    stored procedures, and other features one would expect from a
    full-fledged RDBMS. Plus it's fast--kinterbasdb with embedded
    Firebird 1.5-rc4 is about twice as fast as pysqlite 0.4.3 in various
    trivial speed tests I've tried.

    Embedded Firebird is not the primary focus of the Firebird core
    developers, though, so releases aren't always up to date, and so far,
    binaries have only been released for Windows. Here's the most recent:
    http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/firebird/Firebird-1.5.0.3744_RC4_embed_win32.zip?download

    To use it from Python, see:
    http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/*checkout*/kinterbasdb/Kinterbasdb-3.0/docs/usage.html#faq_fep_embedded_using_with

    I'm not aware of any reason why embedded Firebird couldn't run on *nix
    (the server variant does), but AFAIK no one has done so. Also, I
    haven't used the embedded variant for anything non-trivial, so I can't
    comment on its stability.
  • Gerhard Häring at Aug 27, 2003 at 2:50 pm

    David Rushby wrote:
    Gerhard H?ring wrote:
    If you need [concurrent transactions] I'd suggest you switch to a
    client-server database like PostgreSQL.
    No need to go client/server. Embedded Firebird supports concurrent
    transactions with configurable isolation levels, foreign keys, views,
    stored procedures, and other features one would expect from a
    full-fledged RDBMS. [...]
    The included README says:

    """
    But you should be aware that you cannot access single
    database from a number of the embedded servers
    simultaneously, because they have SuperServer architecture
    and hence exclusively lock attached databases.
    """

    So it doesn't help in a multi-process environment, either (like in CGI
    scripts). But then again, CGI sucks :-P

    Embedded Firebird sounds like a good solution for small *multithreaded*
    application servers, though.
    Plus it's fast--kinterbasdb with embedded Firebird 1.5-rc4 is about
    twice as fast as pysqlite 0.4.3 in various trivial speed tests I've
    tried.
    That's interesting. I wonder how much of that is because of the
    relatively inefficient Python wrapper over SQLite. Time to go on with my
    prototype for PySQLite 0.5 :-)

    -- Gerhard
  • Mark Roach at Aug 28, 2003 at 3:24 pm
    On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 07:34:01 -0700, David Rushby wrote:
    [...]
    No need to go client/server. Embedded Firebird supports concurrent
    transactions with configurable isolation levels, foreign keys, views,
    stored procedures, and other features one would expect from a
    full-fledged RDBMS. Plus it's fast--kinterbasdb with embedded
    Firebird 1.5-rc4 is about twice as fast as pysqlite 0.4.3 in various
    trivial speed tests I've tried.
    I thought Firebird was a web browser?!


    couldn't help myself :-)

    -Mark
  • Patrick Useldinger at Aug 27, 2003 at 8:36 pm

    On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 08:40:34 +0200, Gerhard H?ring wrote:

    Um.. doesn't support transactions? It depends what you mean,
    I guess. It supports transaction commit and rollback and recovery
    but not transaction concurrency... (yet)
    In my case, only one process is supposed to acces the DB, but I need to be
    able to rollback in case it goes wrong, or to commit only all went right.

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
grouppython-list @
categoriespython
postedAug 25, '03 at 9:08p
activeAug 28, '03 at 3:24p
posts10
users8
websitepython.org

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase