From: | <mgould(at)isstrucksoftware(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | francisco(at)npgsql(dot)org |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Rohit Coder" <passionate_programmer(at)hotmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Why PGSQL has no developments in the .NET area? |
Date: | 2011-10-03 16:13:44 |
Message-ID: | 20111003091344.c760ddbd7c0975bc4b045766db7d895c.3a204f1a72.wbe@email16.secureserver.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
The Ngpsql driver isn't old. They've released updates to it all through version 8 and 9 so far as I know. We do some .Net work against Postgres and it seems to work for what we're doing.
Michael Gould
Intermodal Software Solutions, LLC
904-226-0978
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Why PGSQL has no developments in the .NET area?
From: "Francisco Figueiredo Jr." francisco(at)npgsql(dot)org
Date: Mon, October 03, 2011 8:19 am
To: Rohit Coder passionate_programmer(at)hotmail(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Hi!
What usage case of Npgsql are you having performance issues?
On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 00:32, Rohit Coder
passionate_programmer(at)hotmail(dot)com wrote:
PgSQL has just one old NPGSQL driver for .NET, which is itself sluggish. The
ODBC driver works better as compared to NPGSQL, but I suspect the ODBC
driver is not the right choice for ORM framework of .NET.
I want to know whether there is any efficient .NET provider and is PGSQL
compatible with the .NET entity framework.
Regards,
Rohit.
--
Regards,
Francisco Figueiredo Jr.
Npgsql Lead Developer
http://gplus.to/franciscojunior
http://twitter.com/franciscojunior
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dusan Misic | 2011-10-03 16:26:00 | Re: Why PGSQL has no developments in the .NET area? |
Previous Message | Boszormenyi Zoltan | 2011-10-03 16:12:33 | Inconsistency: varchar is equivalent to varchar(255) and also not equivalent? |