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

[Kenneth, GEOGRAF A/S]

SDF is using SQLite as the storage engine.
Unfortunately it changes the internal index structure of the SQLite file.
I'm guessing that this provides better performance.

The change makes the SDF file unaccessible by regular SQLite database tools.

The proposed format will keep the SQLite filestructure intact, thus 
making all SQLite tools compatible.
It will likely be a bit slower (depending on the actual implementation), 
but easy to access from non spatially enabled database applications, 
through SQLite ODBC.

 From my point of view, it will be a much better candidate for a 
personal spatial database than SDF.
The ease of data exchange between spatial and non-spatial applications 
means a lot to me.
Now if only there were providers for MapInfo and Arc.... :)

If the provider is implemented with basic SQL statements, it should be 
able to use any DBMS as spatial storage, not only SQLite.


Regards, Kenneth, GEOGRAF A/S



Bruno Scott skrev:
> Hi all,
> This maybe a stupid question but i tought that the sdf format was a SQLite
> database.
> Is that true?
> If it is, what would e the difference between a SQLLite provider and the
> actual SDF provider?
>
> Bruno
>
>
>
> Traian Stanev wrote:
>   
>> Hello,
>>
>> I just posted FDO RFC #16. Fresh off the virtual presses (printed on 100%
>> recycled electrons, for you green-minded folks):
>>
>> http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc16
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Traian
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> fdo-internals mailing list
>> fdo-internals at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals
>>
>>
>>     
>
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/fdo-internals/attachments/20080325/7bce737f/attachment.html