Confirmed users
683
edits
Bugzilla:FAQ:General Questions: Difference between revisions
Bugzilla:FAQ:General Questions (view source)
Revision as of 21:29, 13 January 2008
, 13 January 2008Bugzilla supports PostgreSQL and Oracle
m (Bugzilla supports PostgreSQL and Oracle) |
|||
| Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
before going ahead. | before going ahead. | ||
== | ==Which versions support MySQL, PostgreSQL and Oracle? What about Sybase/Msql/MSSQL?== | ||
MySQL was originally chosen because it is free, easy to install, | MySQL was originally chosen because it is free, easy to install, | ||
and was available for the hardware Netscape intended to run it on. | and was available for the hardware Netscape intended to run it on. This means all Bugzilla versions support MySQL. | ||
Bugzilla 2.20 contains experimental support for PostgreSQL. | Bugzilla 2.20 contains experimental support for PostgreSQL. | ||
| Line 76: | Line 76: | ||
Red Hat once ran a version of Bugzilla that worked on Oracle, | Red Hat once ran a version of Bugzilla that worked on Oracle, | ||
but that was long, long ago; that version (Bugzilla 2.8) is now obsolete, | but that was long, long ago; that version (Bugzilla 2.8) is now obsolete, | ||
insecure, and totally unsupported. In August of 2005, Wim Coekaerts (Director of Linux Engineering at Oracle Corporation) wrote to Dave Miller confirming that Oracle | insecure, and totally unsupported. In August of 2005, Wim Coekaerts (Director of Linux Engineering at Oracle Corporation) wrote to Dave Miller confirming that Oracle intended to implement and support Bugzilla. Thanks to the help of some Oracle engineers, Bugzilla 3.2 is the first release to support Oracle. | ||
Sybase support is no longer being worked on. Even if it eventually happens, it's VERY unlikely to work without the end-user-company having to stick a few developers on making several manual changes. Sybase is just NOT very standards-compliant (despite all the hype), and it turned out that way too much had to be changed to make it work -- like moving half of the application logic into stored procedures to get any kind of decent performance out of it. | Sybase support is no longer being worked on. Even if it eventually happens, it's VERY unlikely to work without the end-user-company having to stick a few developers on making several manual changes. Sybase is just NOT very standards-compliant (despite all the hype), and it turned out that way too much had to be changed to make it work -- like moving half of the application logic into stored procedures to get any kind of decent performance out of it. | ||