http://qs321.pair.com?node_id=652269


in reply to Re^3: SQL configurations in automated testing
in thread SQL configurations in automated testing

I see.

That's quite interesting.

For this project at least, it doesn't seem to be quite a good fit.

But, it still looks like there's no one quite to run the test suite on a server you're installing on. I'm thinking of weird dragons and discrepancies between the environment of the server I'm developing on and the (thousands) of different servers that may well have it installed on. That still doesn't seem to be a problem DBIx::Class solves (or advertises, I don't think)

 

-justin simoni
skazat me

  • Comment on Re^4: SQL configurations in automated testing

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: SQL configurations in automated testing
by aquarium (Curate) on Nov 22, 2007 at 04:18 UTC
    you're quite right in that even the same operation can work quite differently on the same db engine but on different architecture. the db engine vendors do try to make things as portable but they're never 100%.
    on a side note in regards to different db engines, it's interesting to see some not so minor SQL standard implementations by the different vendors. some of this is documented in Joe Celko's book "SQL for Smarties"
    in terms of further developing your test suite...maybe it could be made more black box like by having a config. As for checking whether a db engine exists on a machine or such, you could run basic sanity check before running tests proper. The sanity check typically written in "eval" style defensive coding to connect to db etc.
    or maybe i'm missing the point entirely?
    the hardest line to type correctly is: stty erase ^H
[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom