From: tsumeruby@... Date: 2006-01-27T10:57:25+09:00 Subject: Re: postgres database On Friday 27 January 2006 10:31 am, Pat Maddox wrote: > On 1/26/06, tsumeruby@tsumelabs.com wrote: > > On Friday 27 January 2006 06:46 am, Dave Howell wrote: > > > On Jan 26, 2006, at 13:32, tsumeruby@tsumelabs.com wrote: > > > > Have you tried the postgres-pr library? The library was brought to my > > > > attention in another email. > > > > > > Yes, some months ago, but the installation failed utterly. I don't even > > > recall what all I got in error messages. Also, I asked on this list a > > > couple weeks ago which of the two (well, three, but two of them are the > > > same thing with different names,) libraries to use, and was steered > > > toward the non-pure-Ruby library. > > > > I see it.. "postgres-ing? Too many choices!" I don't understand how one > > could use a library over another just by someone making a comment, > > "AFAIK, it's not as functional as the native extensions". Perhaps you > > should give the ruby extension another shot, and post bug reports at any > > errors you receive. Pure ruby solutions keep the sanity back in the > > programmer. > > > > Tsume > > I asked Robby Russel, who really knows his stuff when it comes to > postgres, which adapter to use. He said "postgres from RubyGems works > nicely." > > Pat The issue is not about wether one library works better than the other. As long as the library is functional is the most important. However, the original OP was wanting to know a method for not having to compile postgres client library on each platform. Of course the solution is a pure ruby implementation. Tsume