Ruby on Rails

I used SQL Server 2005 for 18 months for a rails application. I recall
having to use both freetds and unixodbc to get the connection to work.
I'm a little hazy on this, but I think one is a higher level
communication protocol, and one is a lower level communication
protocol. Google the rest if it helps

On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 4:08 PM, rhossi <felipecpg@gmail.com> wrote:
> We are developing a solution for a client. Today he is using ASP.NET
> with SQL Server 2008 and wanna use SQL Server 2008 as database for the
> Rails application as well.
>
> So, they were asking us why Active Record uses unixODBC to communicate
> with SQL Server instead of using only freeTDS - they were concerned
> about performance problems.
>
> We googled the subject a little bit, and we weren't able to find any
> Ruby solution that uses solely freeTDS. They all used unixODBC in some
> sort of way.
>
> Questions:
>
> 1) Why the freeTDS solutions out there always uses unixODBC in some
> sort of way?
> 2) Is it possible to communicate with SQL Server using only freeTDS?
> 3) Will we gain any performance using only freeTDS instead of freeTDS
> + unixODBC
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> --
> 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@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
>
>

--
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@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.