Hello Everyone What is the thinking for a backend? I vote for at least allowing CouchDB <http://couchdb.apache.org/> or MongoDB<http://www.mongodb.org/>, but I suppose MySQL will be a necessity. I want to build a nginx/node/mongoDB rig just for fun :>) Todd
Hard to say, I do not have much experience with the "NoSQL" libs out there, but I am all for it when it is appropriate. We will most likely have to go with what is mature at the moment for nodejs (not even sure..), but I would love to transparently support several data stores On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 8:01 AM, Todd Geist <emptyofwhat@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello Everyone > > What is the thinking for a backend? > > I vote for at least allowing CouchDB <http://couchdb.apache.org/> or > MongoDB <http://www.mongodb.org/>, but I suppose MySQL will be > a necessity. > > I want to build a nginx/node/mongoDB rig just for fun :>) > > > Todd > -- Tj Holowaychuk Vision Media President & Creative Lead
+1 for being datastore agnostic. I'd personally like to see support MySQL, sqlite, MongoDB, CouchDB and the newer data stores like Riak. Alistair Holt On 10 February 2010 16:19, vision media [ Tj Holowaychuk ] < tj@vision-media.ca> wrote: > Hard to say, I do not have much experience with the "NoSQL" libs out there, > but I am all for it when it is appropriate. We will most likely have to go > with what > is mature at the moment for nodejs (not even sure..), but I would love to > transparently support several data stores > > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 8:01 AM, Todd Geist <emptyofwhat@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hello Everyone >> >> What is the thinking for a backend? >> >> I vote for at least allowing CouchDB <http://couchdb.apache.org/> or >> MongoDB <http://www.mongodb.org/>, but I suppose MySQL will be >> a necessity. >> >> I want to build a nginx/node/mongoDB rig just for fun :>) >> >> >> Todd >> > > > > -- > Tj Holowaychuk > Vision Media > President & Creative Lead >
On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 08:01 -0800, Todd Geist wrote: > I vote for at least allowing CouchDB or MongoDB, but I suppose MySQL > will be a necessity. MySQL isn't quite properly supported by node.js yet. SQLite support also is sync-only so far, but I <3 SQLite. If someone's installing a CMS based on node.js, I think it's safe to assume that they're able and willing to install stuff that's a bit unusual. But at the same time one would like to be able to have access to existing data. Seems like it would be hard to interchangeably support data sources with vastly different paradigms. (Most projects are lucky to support two SQL dialects, ya know?) Would like to see how folks who have done this successfully have done it. > I want to build a nginx/node/mongoDB rig just for fun :>) Yes, this. (But I'm curious to see if nginx is needed at all.) -- Joshua Paine LetterBlock: Web applications built with joy http://letterblock.com/ 301-576-1920
I dont disagree at all, the only thing I would like to aim for in the future is to have things as easy as possible for non-developers to install and get running. But of course to gain support we need to make it developer-friendly and powerful first :D On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 9:32 AM, Joshua Paine <joshua@letterblock.com>wrote: > On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 08:01 -0800, Todd Geist wrote: > > > I vote for at least allowing CouchDB or MongoDB, but I suppose MySQL > > will be a necessity. > > MySQL isn't quite properly supported by node.js yet. SQLite support also > is sync-only so far, but I <3 SQLite. > > If someone's installing a CMS based on node.js, I think it's safe to > assume that they're able and willing to install stuff that's a bit > unusual. But at the same time one would like to be able to have access > to existing data. > > Seems like it would be hard to interchangeably support data sources with > vastly different paradigms. (Most projects are lucky to support two SQL > dialects, ya know?) Would like to see how folks who have done this > successfully have done it. > > > I want to build a nginx/node/mongoDB rig just for fun :>) > > Yes, this. (But I'm curious to see if nginx is needed at all.) > > > -- > Joshua Paine > LetterBlock: Web applications built with joy > http://letterblock.com/ > 301-576-1920 > > -- Tj Holowaychuk Vision Media President & Creative Lead
If we are aiming for drupal, it some day has to be as easy to setup as drupal is. That is a long way off obviously. I think data store agnostic is pretty critical. NoSQL<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NoSQL>is getting more an more popular. And quite frankly it is a pretty good fit for a CMS. But I don't think we can get by with out MySQL support. However there are some folks out there using MySQL in NoSQL kind of way. Check out Friendly <http://friendlyorm.com/>. Its an ORM for Ruby that does NoSQL with MySQL. and FriendFeed is using MySQL<http://bret.appspot.com/entry/how-friendfeed-uses-mysql>the same way. http://friendlyorm.com/ http://bret.appspot.com/entry/how-friendfeed-uses-mysql If we shoot for some kind of Persistance Wrapper from the beginning it should be possible to deal with different data stores. Todd
Thats the one problem, nothing is as widely adopted as PHP so that will be really tricky. Yeah thats very true there is no reason we cant just piggy-back the relational databases in an non relational way. I think that will cut down on the ORM cruft too, SQL generation becomes really retarded On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 10:40 AM, Todd Geist <emptyofwhat@gmail.com> wrote: > If we are aiming for drupal, it some day has to be as easy to setup as > drupal is. That is a long way off obviously. > > I think data store agnostic is pretty critical. NoSQL<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NoSQL>is getting more an more popular. And quite frankly it is a pretty good fit > for a CMS. But I don't think we can get by with out MySQL support. However > there are some folks out there using MySQL in NoSQL kind of way. > > Check out Friendly <http://friendlyorm.com/>. Its an ORM for Ruby that > does NoSQL with MySQL. and FriendFeed is using MySQL<http://bret.appspot.com/entry/how-friendfeed-uses-mysql>the same way. > > http://friendlyorm.com/ > http://bret.appspot.com/entry/how-friendfeed-uses-mysql > > If we shoot for some kind of Persistance Wrapper from the beginning it > should be possible to deal with different data stores. > > Todd > -- Tj Holowaychuk Vision Media President & Creative Lead
Have you guys checked out Persistence ( http://github.com/creationix/node-persistence)? Alistair Holt On 10 February 2010 19:11, vision media [ Tj Holowaychuk ] < tj@vision-media.ca> wrote: > Thats the one problem, nothing is as widely adopted as PHP so that will be > really tricky. > > Yeah thats very true there is no reason we cant just piggy-back the relational databases > in an non relational way. I think that will cut down on the ORM cruft too, > SQL generation > becomes really retarded > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 10:40 AM, Todd Geist <emptyofwhat@gmail.com>wrote: > >> If we are aiming for drupal, it some day has to be as easy to setup as >> drupal is. That is a long way off obviously. >> >> I think data store agnostic is pretty critical. NoSQL<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NoSQL>is getting more an more popular. And quite frankly it is a pretty good fit >> for a CMS. But I don't think we can get by with out MySQL support. However >> there are some folks out there using MySQL in NoSQL kind of way. >> >> Check out Friendly <http://friendlyorm.com/>. Its an ORM for Ruby that >> does NoSQL with MySQL. and FriendFeed is using MySQL<http://bret.appspot.com/entry/how-friendfeed-uses-mysql>the same way. >> >> http://friendlyorm.com/ >> http://bret.appspot.com/entry/how-friendfeed-uses-mysql >> >> If we shoot for some kind of Persistance Wrapper from the beginning it >> should be possible to deal with different data stores. >> >> Todd >> > > > > -- > Tj Holowaychuk > Vision Media > President & Creative Lead >