DrySQL is a plug-in that extends ActiveRecord to provide a complete DRY solution for Object-Relational Mapping. You''ve defined columns, constraints, relationships, and keys on your DB. With DrySQL you don''t need to re-define any of these things in your Ruby code. If you have tables, keys, and columns that don''t follow the Rails naming conventions, have a complex database schema, want a DRY ORM solution for your Ruby desktop app (as well as your Rails web app), and performance and flexibility are important to you...Check out DrySQL. The official RubyForge homepage is the best source of documentation at the moment: http://drysql.rubyforge.org/ My blog also hosts some discussion of implementation: http://allyourdatabase.blogspot.com/ I''m looking forward to hearing your feedback. Cheers. - Bryan -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Could you contrast the features of DrySQL against Dr. Nic''s Magic Models? I''m confused about what differences there are, if any. Can they be used together? Should they? http://magicmodels.rubyforge.org/ -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Kevin Williams wrote:> Could you contrast the features of DrySQL against Dr. Nic''s Magic > Models? I''m confused about what differences there are, if any. Can they > be used together? Should they? > > http://magicmodels.rubyforge.org/Hi Kevin Sorry I didn''t make this more clear...I suppose the differences immediately stand out for me because I use DrySQL against legacy databases, and primarily in Ruby apps that are not Rails web apps (DrySQL does support Rails web apps, though). On the RubyForge homepage (http://drysql.rubyforge.org) there is a section titled "DrySQL: Overview of Features" that outlines 6 main features, none of which (to my knowledge) is provided by Magic Models. The main difference is that the implementation of DrySQL makes ORM truly DRY. Everything is generated based on your DB''s information schema, so you are not constrained in any way by naming conventions (i.e. foreign key names, primary key names, table names, etc). A short answer to your question is that DrySQL takes a different approach to the features of Magic Models, and offers a number of new features as well. Magic Models is an excellent piece of work, but unfortunately it did not do what I needed it to do For a better/clearer explanation, you may want to check out the exmaples on the DrySQL RubyForge home page, and if you have any more questions I''ll be happy to answer them Cheers. - Bryan -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Bryan Evans wrote:> The main difference is that the implementation of DrySQL makes ORM truly > DRY. Everything is generated based on your DB''s information schema, so > you are not constrained in any way by naming conventions (i.e. foreign > key names, primary key names, table names, etc).Awesome. I work for a company where the philosophy is that you build a good database schema first - designed so that it can outlive whatever app server you use to create interfaces. Spoiled by PostgreSQL, I suppose. No matter what, we''re going to enforce constraints and relations in the database - so to have a layer that''ll keep us from having to repeat ourselves in model definitions would be perfect. One idea - with another ORM wrapper (Alzabo - www.alzabo.org) I used PostgreSQL comment fields to specify more advanced field attributes. The idea of using comments in your database to specify more detailed column information makes a lot of sense to me. You''ll from me again, most likely . . . -DJCP -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Here I was all exicted till I got to the bottom of the page and didn''t see MS SQL Server included. It was almost an immediate answer to my problem. Stuart On 11/7/06, Daniel Collis-puro <rails-mailing-list-ARtvInVfO7ksV2N9l4h3zg@public.gmane.org> wrote:> > > Bryan Evans wrote: > > The main difference is that the implementation of DrySQL makes ORM truly > > DRY. Everything is generated based on your DB''s information schema, so > > you are not constrained in any way by naming conventions (i.e. foreign > > key names, primary key names, table names, etc). > > Awesome. I work for a company where the philosophy is that you build a > good database schema first - designed so that it can outlive whatever > app server you use to create interfaces. Spoiled by PostgreSQL, I > suppose. No matter what, we''re going to enforce constraints and > relations in the database - so to have a layer that''ll keep us from > having to repeat ourselves in model definitions would be perfect. > > One idea - with another ORM wrapper (Alzabo - www.alzabo.org) I used > PostgreSQL comment fields to specify more advanced field attributes. The > idea of using comments in your database to specify more detailed column > information makes a lot of sense to me. > > You''ll from me again, most likely . . . > > -DJCP > > -- > Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. > > > >-- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_ambient --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Stuart Fellowes wrote:> Here I was all exicted till I got to the bottom of the page and didn''t > see > MS SQL Server included. > It was almost an immediate answer to my problem. > Stuart > > On 11/7/06, Daniel Collis-puro <rails-mailing-list-ARtvInVfO7ksV2N9l4h3zg@public.gmane.org> wrote: >> app server you use to create interfaces. Spoiled by PostgreSQL, I >> >> -DJCP >> >> -- >> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. >> >> > >> > > > --Hi Stuart Adding SQL Server support will not be difficult. Most of the code in DrySQL is database agnostic. I will just need to create an extension to the existing sqlserver Rails adapter that implements DrySQL''s AbstractAdapter interface. It wouldn''t be unreasonable to say that I could implement support for SQL Server in the next couple of weeks if I can get my hands on a copy of SQL Server for testing. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Bryan, I wish I could help but have no access (no pun intended) to SQL Server. Please let us know though when you add the support. Thanks Stuart On 11/7/06, Bryan Evans <rails-mailing-list-ARtvInVfO7ksV2N9l4h3zg@public.gmane.org> wrote:> > > Stuart Fellowes wrote: > > Here I was all exicted till I got to the bottom of the page and didn''t > > see > > MS SQL Server included. > > It was almost an immediate answer to my problem. > > Stuart > > > > On 11/7/06, Daniel Collis-puro <rails-mailing-list-ARtvInVfO7ksV2N9l4h3zg@public.gmane.org> wrote: > >> app server you use to create interfaces. Spoiled by PostgreSQL, I > >> > >> -DJCP > >> > >> -- > >> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. > >> > >> > > >> > > > > > > -- > > > Hi Stuart > > Adding SQL Server support will not be difficult. Most of the code in > DrySQL is database agnostic. I will just need to create an extension to > the existing sqlserver Rails adapter that implements DrySQL''s > AbstractAdapter interface. > > It wouldn''t be unreasonable to say that I could implement support for > SQL Server in the next couple of weeks if I can get my hands on a copy > of SQL Server for testing. > > -- > Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. > > > >-- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_ambient --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
You all can get free copies of SQl Server Express from http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/express/. _____ From: rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org [mailto:rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Dark Ambient Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2006 9:35 PM To: rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org Subject: [Rails] Re: [ANN] DrySQL Bryan, I wish I could help but have no access (no pun intended) to SQL Server. Please let us know though when you add the support. Thanks Stuart On 11/7/06, Bryan Evans <rails-mailing-list-ARtvInVfO7ksV2N9l4h3zg@public.gmane.org> wrote: Stuart Fellowes wrote:> Here I was all exicted till I got to the bottom of the page and didn''t > see > MS SQL Server included. > It was almost an immediate answer to my problem. > Stuart > > On 11/7/06, Daniel Collis-puro <rails-mailing-list-ARtvInVfO7ksV2N9l4h3zg@public.gmane.org> wrote: >> app server you use to create interfaces. Spoiled by PostgreSQL, I >> >> -DJCP >> >> -- >> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. >> >> > >> > > > --Hi Stuart Adding SQL Server support will not be difficult. Most of the code in DrySQL is database agnostic. I will just need to create an extension to the existing sqlserver Rails adapter that implements DrySQL''s AbstractAdapter interface. It wouldn''t be unreasonable to say that I could implement support for SQL Server in the next couple of weeks if I can get my hands on a copy of SQL Server for testing. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_ambient --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Matt Scilipoti wrote:> You all can get free copies of SQl Server Express from > http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/express/. > > _____ >Thanks Matt That''ll do quite nicely. Time to dust off my Windows box - Bryan -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Is Oracle support in the works? This seems perfect for me, but alas, no Oracle support. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Sam wrote:> Is Oracle support in the works? This seems perfect for me, but alas, no > Oracle support.Yes, I do plan to add Oracle support, along with DB2 and SQL Server. With luck this functionality will be released in the next month. I''ll keep you posted -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
ATTN: Stuart and other SQL Server users... DrySQL now supports SQL Server! (as of version 0.1.3) It has been tested only against SQL Server Express 2005, but should work with any version of SQL Server that offers the information_schema views. DB2 and Oracle support will follow shortly Cheers. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Bryan Evans wrote:> ATTN: Stuart and other SQL Server users... > > DrySQL now supports SQL Server! > (as of version 0.1.3) > > It has been tested only against SQL Server Express 2005, but should work > with any version of SQL Server that offers the information_schema views. > > DB2 and Oracle support will follow shortly > > Cheers. > > > -- > Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.Please support Sqlite, if you don''t already have plans to do so. Thanks Jabari --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Yep, count this as another vote for SQLite - I''m really getting to like it for apps where there''s not a huge amount of data and I just need a DB that works... Regards Dave M. On 17/11/06, jzakiya <jzakiya-O5WfVfzUwx8@public.gmane.org> wrote:> > Bryan Evans wrote: > > ATTN: Stuart and other SQL Server users... > > > > DrySQL now supports SQL Server! > > (as of version 0.1.3) > > > > It has been tested only against SQL Server Express 2005, but should work > > with any version of SQL Server that offers the information_schema views. > > > > DB2 and Oracle support will follow shortly > > > > Cheers. > > > > > > -- > > Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. > > Please support Sqlite, if you don''t already have plans to do so. > > Thanks > > Jabari > > > > >--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Can I use it with scaffolding_extension ? I have a very complex legacy project I have mapped out quite nicely in ActiveRecord, and uses scaffolding_extensions. I''d like to add DRYSql to it even though it likely isn;t needed, just to start using it, but only want to do it if there;s not a ton of work to be done (because it works now, as is, but, of course, I;d like to learn a faster, simpler way!) Thanks. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On 11/17/06, Ike <rvince99-PkbjNfxxIARBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:> Can I use it with scaffolding_extension ?I see no reason why not. I haven''t used DrySQL, but looking at what it does, it should work with scaffolding_extensions. Try it and report back to the list. Jeremy --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Ike wrote:> Can I use it with scaffolding_extension ? I have a very complex legacy > project I have mapped out quite nicely in ActiveRecord, and uses > scaffolding_extensions. I''d like to add DRYSql to it even though it > likely isn;t needed, just to start using it, but only want to do it if > there;s not a ton of work to be done (because it works now, as is, but, > of course, I;d like to learn a faster, simpler way!) Thanks.Yes, DrySQL should be compatible with scaffolding_extension. DrySQL is simply a collection of extensions to the existing modules and classes in ActiveRecord, and should be compatible with any plug-ins that are compatible with ActiveRecord. If anybody does happen to come across a plug-in that DrySQL does not play nice with, please let me know and I will address it. Cheers. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Sam wrote:> Is Oracle support in the works? This seems perfect for me, but alas, no > Oracle support.Sam (and any other Oracle users out there that might be following this thread): DrySQL now supports Oracle, as of version 0.1.4 Cheers. http://drysql.rubyforge.org -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Looks great. Two requests: 1. Is there a way to enable it only for certain models? (Let me use it on my legacy models, for instance, and keep my new models without it.) 2. How ''bout an option to generate the required code to stdout, instead of just running it. So I could do: puts LegacyModel.dry_sql_code and get: "set_primary_key ''lm_id''\n" "belongs_to :xyz" etc. Useful for debugging, learning, and when you still want to retain control (I have something similar to this in a rake script) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Robert James wrote:> Looks great. > > Two requests: > 1. Is there a way to enable it only for certain models? (Let me use it > on my legacy models, for instance, and keep my new models without it.) > > 2. How ''bout an option to generate the required code to stdout, instead > of just running it. So I could do: > > puts LegacyModel.dry_sql_code > > and get: > "set_primary_key ''lm_id''\n" > "belongs_to :xyz" > etc. > > Useful for debugging, learning, and when you still want to retain > control (I have something similar to this in a rake script)Hi Robert Thanks for the feedback. Do you mind posting your suggestions to the DrySQL discussion forum? http://rubyforge.org/forum/?group_id=2438 I''m getting requests, suggestions, etc from a bunch of different channels, and am trying to make the DrySQL RubyForge forums the central home for these discussions. Thanks. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---