Re: Oracle and ODBC

GreyBeard <Fuzzy.GreyBeard_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 20:47:02 +0000, xhoster wrote:
>
> > But I don't see why they couldn't use:
> >
> > client >> transport >> translator >> database.
> >
> > It seems you would lose very little, and the gain of having to install
> > the db-specific translator on 1 server rather than 100 clients would be
> > substantial.
> >
> > Yes, you would loose the functionality of SQL*Net, but haven't you
> > effectively lost them already by using a lowest common denominator API?
>
> I'm missing something here in your logic, from an ODBC viewpoint.
>
> Assuming Oracle only responds to SQL*Net, Net8, OracleNetwork requests
> across the network, how would your ODBC talk to Oracle without a SQL*Net
> component, or something extra installed at the server side in addition to
> the client side?

That is just it. There would be something installed on the server side. the db-specific ODBC adapter on the server side would connect to Oracle using BEQ (or SQL*NET or Net8 or whatever you want) and would do all the db-specific translation between ODBC API and Oracle, so the client side would need nothing DB-specific installed on it.

> Remember the ODBC spec pretty old and created in the days when
> client-server was king and 10-15 clients was serious. From where I
> stand, you really need to create a time machine, go back and knock some
> sense into the organization that backed the spec.

Sigh, if only I had a time machine and a baseball bat big enough.

Xho

-- 
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service                        $9.95/Month 30GB