[fdo-internals] Vote: FDO RFC 16 - FDO Provider for SQLite

Frank Warmerdam warmerdam at pobox.com
Tue Apr 1 12:21:47 EDT 2008

Badreddine Karoui wrote:
> Regardless of the terminology; these two providers persist their data to an
> SQLite file. The idea would be to upgrade the SDF provider to write SQLite
> complaint data blocks that can be consumed by other SQLite
> tools/applications. At the same time the SDF provider maintains its backward
> compatibility to its current format. We get a seemless transition to the new
> format and stability since the bulk of the SDF provider code will be
> re-used. Also, since the SDF will continue to bypass the SQLite virtual
> machine, the performance will not be degraded at least not by much.


I'll concede I have limited familiarity with SDF, but I think the
differences are so vast that the fact that aspects of sqlite unpin both
is not very relavent.  It's a bit like saying that since GeoRSS and
GML are both XML based formats they should be handled through the same

I think distinct drivers for these very different situations is appropriate.

Best regards,
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam at pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org

More information about the fdo-internals mailing list