# PDO Oracle driver - Thread: https://externals.io/message/85884 - Original archive: https://news-web.php.net/php.internals/85884 - Started by Stelian Mocanita on 2015-04-22T09:40:53+00:00 - Messages: 43 - Page 1 of 2: messages 1 to 25 (25 per page, add `?page=N` to the URL) - Next page: https://externals.io/message/85884.md?page=2 - Reply by email to internals@lists.php.net - More for agents: search with https://externals.io/search.md?q={query} · JSON API at https://externals.io/api · documentation at https://externals.io/llms.txt --- ## #85884 — Stelian Mocanita — 2015-04-22T09:40:53+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85884 Hello internals, I would like to ask what on your thoughts on removing the Oracle drive for PDO from the documentation (http://us1.php.net/manual/en/ref.pdo-oci.php) at least since it's been experimental for a long time now, and it has long standing open bugs, such as: https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=37706 https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=46728 https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=60994 I know that the extension is marked as experimental already but based on the current status, it's not even that and a significant amount of basic functionality is broken. Regards, Stelian --- ## #85885 — Marco Pivetta — 2015-04-22T09:42:50+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85885 · In reply to: #85884 Absolutely +1 - most developers are dragged into using the PDO Oracle driver by "hope" (since they find the docs), and then they get to know the sad truth about it... Marco Pivetta http://twitter.com/Ocramius http://ocramius.github.com/ On 22 April 2015 at 10:40, Stelian Mocanita wrote: > Hello internals, > > I would like to ask what on your thoughts on removing the Oracle drive for > PDO from the documentation (http://us1.php.net/manual/en/ref.pdo-oci.php) > at least since it's been experimental for a long time now, and it has long > standing open bugs, such as: > > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=37706 > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=46728 > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=60994 > > I know that the extension is marked as experimental already but based on > the current status, it's not even that and a significant amount of basic > functionality is broken. > > Regards, > Stelian --- ## #85887 — Paul Dragoonis — 2015-04-22T10:15:51+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85887 · In reply to: #85885 +1 from me. If nobody is maintaining it then it's a big risk. It should be brought back in when there's people to maintain it. > Absolutely +1 - most developers are dragged into using the PDO Oracle > driver by "hope" (since they find the docs), and then they get to know the > sad truth about it... > > Marco Pivetta > > http://twitter.com/Ocramius > > http://ocramius.github.com/ > > On 22 April 2015 at 10:40, Stelian Mocanita > wrote: > > > […] > for > > […] > ) > > […] > long > > […] --- ## #85888 — Chris Wright — 2015-04-22T10:19:51+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85888 · In reply to: #85884 On 22 April 2015 at 10:40, Stelian Mocanita wrote: > Hello internals, > > I would like to ask what on your thoughts on removing the Oracle drive for > PDO from the documentation (http://us1.php.net/manual/en/ref.pdo-oci.php) > at least since it's been experimental for a long time now, and it has long > standing open bugs, such as: > > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=37706 > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=46728 > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=60994 > > I know that the extension is marked as experimental already but based on > the current status, it's not even that and a significant amount of basic > functionality is broken. > > Regards, > Stelian > It shouldn't just be undocumented and the src left in core, it should probably be moved to PECL . Also, it would be good to know what those who have worked on this in the past consider the state of this extension to be. The last commit I can see that was directly related to it (as opposed to project-wide fixes like find/replace for new macros, big blobs of typo fixes etc) was in 2011, but it looks like a few people have put a fair amount of work in prior to that... are there any technical blockers on progress, or is it simply that there's not enough demand for it/people haven't had the time to work on it? --- ## #85889 — Peter Cowburn — 2015-04-22T10:24:07+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85889 · In reply to: #85884 cc-ing doc list On 22 April 2015 at 10:40, Stelian Mocanita wrote: > Hello internals, > > I would like to ask what on your thoughts on removing the Oracle drive for > PDO from the documentation (http://us1.php.net/manual/en/ref.pdo-oci.php) > at least since it's been experimental for a long time now, and it has long > standing open bugs, such as: > > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=37706 > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=46728 > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=60994 > > I know that the extension is marked as experimental already but based on > the current status, it's not even that and a significant amount of basic > functionality is broken. > > Regards, > Stelian --- ## #85890 — Benjamin Eberlei — 2015-04-22T10:29:13+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85890 · In reply to: #85889 On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Peter Cowburn wrote: > cc-ing doc list > > On 22 April 2015 at 10:40, Stelian Mocanita > wrote: > > > […] > for > > […] > ) > > […] > long > > […] > When working on Doctrine support for Oracle we quickly realized that a lot of bugfixes are done in oci8, but PDO_OCI doesnt get them. A big +1 from me for removing this extension from core, given its critical bugs/segfaults with simple features like CLOBs i cannot recommend it to anyone. > > […] --- ## #85891 — Matteo Beccati — 2015-04-22T10:31:12+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85891 · In reply to: #85884 /cc cjones > Hello internals, > > I would like to ask what on your thoughts on removing the Oracle drive for > PDO from the documentation (http://us1.php.net/manual/en/ref.pdo-oci.php) > at least since it's been experimental for a long time now, and it has long > standing open bugs, such as: > > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=37706 > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=46728 > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=60994 > > I know that the extension is marked as experimental already but based on > the current status, it's not even that and a significant amount of basic > functionality is broken. > > Regards, > Stelian > -- Matteo Beccati Development & Consulting - http://www.beccati.com/ --- ## #85892 — Peter Cowburn — 2015-04-22T10:34:15+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85892 · In reply to: #85889 > cc-ing doc list > > On 22 April 2015 at 10:40, Stelian Mocanita > wrote: > > > […] > From the documentation point of view: Just because an extension is considered experimental, or indeed unmaintained, is no reason to remove the extension from the manual. We have a bunch of extensions marked as experimental [1] or dead [2] and I don't see why pdo_oci should be any different. > > > […] > Let's mark the extension as "dead" in the manual, as we do with other dead extensions. > > > […] > > [1] bcompiler, blenc, dbplus, haru, memtrack, ming, paradox, pdo_4d, pdo_oci, sca, sdodasrel, spl_types, svn, swish, vpopmail, xmlrpc [2] classkit, fam, fdf, iisfunc, msession, nis, session_pgsql --- ## #85893 — Stelian Mocanita — 2015-04-22T10:40:01+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85893 · In reply to: #85892 Peter, I did not know about the documentation part, thanks for clearing that out. I would like to ask though, what is the benefit of having the dead extensions there? From my point of view, it does more harm than good having them in the manual (I am only referring here to extensions that never got to a production grade). On marking the extension as dead, how would we proceed in this case? Thank you, Stelian On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Peter Cowburn wrote: > > > > > > […] > From the documentation point of view: > > Just because an extension is considered experimental, or indeed > unmaintained, is no reason to remove the extension from the manual. We > have a bunch of extensions marked as experimental [1] or dead [2] and I > don't see why pdo_oci should be any different. > > > > […] > Let's mark the extension as "dead" in the manual, as we do with other dead > extensions. > > > > […] > [1] bcompiler, blenc, dbplus, haru, memtrack, ming, paradox, pdo_4d, > pdo_oci, sca, sdodasrel, spl_types, svn, swish, vpopmail, xmlrpc > [2] classkit, fam, fdf, iisfunc, msession, nis, session_pgsql --- ## #85894 — Peter Cowburn — 2015-04-22T10:57:30+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85894 · In reply to: #85893 > Peter, > > I did not know about the documentation part, thanks for clearing that out. > > I would like to ask though, what is the benefit of having the dead > extensions there? > From my point of view, it does more harm than good having them in the > manual > (I am only referring here to extensions that never got to a production > grade). > > On marking the extension as dead, how would we proceed in this case? > We have boilerplate text for marking PECL extensions as dead, and we would use that again here. However, I'd hold off on that until a decision (if any) has been made on what to do with the extension itself, like moving it (back) to PECL. We shouldn't be distributing a "dead" extension in the main php-src tree, nor proclaiming an extension "dead" in the manual when that hasn't been "officially" decided yet. > > Thank you, > Stelian > > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Peter Cowburn > wrote: > > > […] --- ## #85895 — Lester Caine — 2015-04-22T11:03:06+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85895 · In reply to: #85890 > When working on Doctrine support for Oracle we quickly realized that a lot > of bugfixes are done in oci8, but PDO_OCI doesnt get them. > > A big +1 from me for removing this extension from core, given its critical > bugs/segfaults with simple features like CLOBs i cannot recommend it to > anyone. It's not just PDO_OCI that is not getting as much love as other parts of the database driver interface. The generic drivers are still preferred over PDO which only provide a subset of engines. and PHP7 is going to affect other areas of the database infrastructure so perhaps we just need a review of all aspects? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk --- ## #85896 — Christoph Becker — 2015-04-22T11:13:46+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85896 · In reply to: #85884 Stelian Mocanita wrote: > > I would like to ask what on your thoughts on removing the Oracle drive for > PDO from the documentation (http://us1.php.net/manual/en/ref.pdo-oci.php) > at least since it's been experimental for a long time now, and it has long > standing open bugs, such as: > > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=37706 > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=46728 > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=60994 > > I know that the extension is marked as experimental already but based on > the current status, it's not even that and a significant amount of basic > functionality is broken. The removal of pdo_oci had been suggested as part of the "Removal of dead or not yet PHP7 ported SAPIs and extensions" RFC, but there has been feedback from Christopher Jones, that the extension will be supported by Oracle.[1] [1] -- Christoph M. Becker --- ## #85901 — Stelian Mocanita — 2015-04-22T13:39:13+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85901 · In reply to: #85896 > > The removal of pdo_oci had been suggested as part of the "Removal of > dead or not yet PHP7 ported SAPIs and extensions" RFC, but there has > been feedback from Christopher Jones, that the extension will be > supported by Oracle.[1] > [1] > < > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/removal_of_dead_sapis_and_exts#extpdo_oci_and_extoci8 > > […] Thanks for the info. Having Oracle supporting the extensions would be great, but I still feel like they should be re-released or something when they are done. While the OCI8 ext works with current versions, pdo_oci has been experimental for a long time and never reached maturity. Maybe Christopher Jones can jump in here and shed some light on the matter. Regards, Stelian > Stelian Mocanita wrote: > > […] > for > > […] > ) > > […] > long > > […] > > The removal of pdo_oci had been suggested as part of the "Removal of > dead or not yet PHP7 ported SAPIs and extensions" RFC, but there has > been feedback from Christopher Jones, that the extension will be > supported by Oracle.[1] > > [1] > < > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/removal_of_dead_sapis_and_exts#extpdo_oci_and_extoci8 > > […] > > -- > Christoph M. Becker --- ## #85902 — Pasindu De Silva — 2015-04-22T13:44:48+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85902 · In reply to: #85896 > > [1] > < > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/removal_of_dead_sapis_and_exts#extpdo_oci_and_extoci8 > > […] As of this RFC we probably can document that these extensions and sapis are removed as of PHP 7. -- *Pasindu De Silva**ppasindud@gmail.com * --- ## #85903 — Rowan Collins — 2015-04-22T16:02:57+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85903 · In reply to: #85902 Pasindu De Silva wrote on 22/04/2015 14:44: > > > […] > > As of this RFC we probably can document that these extensions and sapis > are removed as of PHP 7. > I think you've misread that page. These extensions were not voted on for removal, because a maintainer stepped forward. The current status in PHP 7 is therefore the same as the status in PHP 5. Regards, -- Rowan Collins [IMSoP] --- ## #85904 — Jonah H. Harris — 2015-04-22T16:10:49+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85904 · In reply to: #85901 On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Stelian Mocanita < stelian.mocanita@gmail.com> wrote: > > […] > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/removal_of_dead_sapis_and_exts#extpdo_oci_and_extoci8 > > […] > > > Thanks for the info. Having Oracle supporting the extensions would be > great, > but I still feel like they should be re-released or something when they are > done. > While the OCI8 ext works with current versions, pdo_oci has been > experimental > for a long time and never reached maturity. > > Maybe Christopher Jones can jump in here and shed some light on the matter. > I'd prefer to keep it in the tree. Let me talk to the people I know at Oracle and see. If they won't maintain it, my company will. -- Jonah H. Harris Blog: http://www.oracle-internals.com/ --- ## #85905 — Christoph Becker — 2015-04-22T16:12:26+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85905 · In reply to: #85903 Rowan Collins wrote: > Pasindu De Silva wrote on 22/04/2015 14:44: > > […] > > I think you've misread that page. These extensions were not voted on for > removal, because a maintainer stepped forward. > > The current status in PHP 7 is therefore the same as the status in PHP 5. I assume Pasindu is referring to the other extensions and sapis subject to the RFC that will be removed, e.g. ext/mssql. For these extensions/sapis the respective documentation has to be adjusted. -- Christoph M. Becker --- ## #85906 — Pasindu De Silva — 2015-04-22T16:25:39+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85906 · In reply to: #85905 That's right. > Rowan Collins wrote: > > > […] > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/removal_of_dead_sapis_and_exts#extpdo_oci_and_extoci8 > > […] > > I assume Pasindu is referring to the other extensions and sapis subject > to the RFC that will be removed, e.g. ext/mssql. For these > extensions/sapis the respective documentation has to be adjusted. > > -- > Christoph M. Becker > > > -- > > > > -- *Pasindu De Silva**ppasindud@gmail.com * --- ## #85907 — Pierre Joye — 2015-04-23T04:08:38+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85907 · In reply to: #85884 +1, and need RFC. On Apr 22, 2015 4:41 PM, "Stelian Mocanita" wrote: > Hello internals, > > I would like to ask what on your thoughts on removing the Oracle drive for > PDO from the documentation (http://us1.php.net/manual/en/ref.pdo-oci.php) > at least since it's been experimental for a long time now, and it has long > standing open bugs, such as: > > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=37706 > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=46728 > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=60994 > > I know that the extension is marked as experimental already but based on > the current status, it's not even that and a significant amount of basic > functionality is broken. > > Regards, > Stelian --- ## #85909 — christopher jones — 2015-04-23T05:50:20+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85909 · In reply to: #85901 > > […] > > > Thanks for the info. Having Oracle supporting the extensions would be great, but I still feel like they should be re-released or something when > they are done. While the OCI8 ext works with current versions, pdo_oci has been experimental for a long time and never reached maturity. > > Maybe Christopher Jones can jump in here and shed some light on the matter. > > Regards, Stelian > > > > > […] > The current state is that we will be looking at PDO_OCI and OCI8 for PHP 7 in a short while. Our good intentions got delayed as we have been working on drivers for other languages (https://github.com/oracle/node-oracledb and https://bitbucket.org/anthony_tuininga/cx_oracle/). I think the 'experimental' tag is unwarranted. It has some bugs - probably fewer than the rest of PHP, but is usable. Yes, we do recommend using OCI8 over PDO_OCI. This is partly due to some inherent design and performance weaknesses of the overall PDO architecture. So, lets not mark PDO_OCI as dead just yet. Chris -- christopher.jones@oracle.com http://twitter.com/ghrd --- ## #85910 — christopher jones — 2015-04-23T05:54:38+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85910 · In reply to: #85884 > Hello internals, > > I would like to ask what on your thoughts on removing the Oracle drive for > PDO from the documentation (http://us1.php.net/manual/en/ref.pdo-oci.php) > at least since it's been experimental for a long time now, and it has long > standing open bugs, such as: > > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=37706 > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=46728 > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=60994 > > I know that the extension is marked as experimental already but based on > the current status, it's not even that and a significant amount of basic > functionality is broken. > > Regards, > Stelian > For the record, only one of those bugs is open. The other may already have been fixed. But I get your point. Chris -- christopher.jones@oracle.com http://twitter.com/ghrd --- ## #85911 — christopher jones — 2015-04-23T05:58:54+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85911 · In reply to: #85904 > > > > […] > > > Thanks for the info. Having Oracle supporting the extensions would be > great, > but I still feel like they should be re-released or something when they are > done. > While the OCI8 ext works with current versions, pdo_oci has been > experimental > for a long time and never reached maturity. > > Maybe Christopher Jones can jump in here and shed some light on the matter. > > > I'd prefer to keep it in the tree. Let me talk to the people I know at Oracle and see. If they won't maintain it, my company will. > > -- > Jonah H. Harris > Blog: http://www.oracle-internals.com/ Hi Jonah, Patches are most welcome. Chris -- christopher.jones@oracle.com http://twitter.com/ghrd --- ## #85914 — Lester Caine — 2015-04-23T10:00:07+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85914 · In reply to: #85909 > Yes, we do recommend using OCI8 over PDO_OCI. This is partly due to > some inherent design and performance weaknesses of the overall PDO > architecture. > > So, lets not mark PDO_OCI as dead just yet. It's nice to hear that it's not only the pdo_firebird driver that is restricted by PDO. Which why I was asking for a general review on the situation on database access. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk --- ## #85915 — Arvids Godjuks — 2015-04-23T10:22:00+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85915 · In reply to: #85914 чт, 23 Апр 2015, 13:00, Lester Caine : > Yes, we do recommend using OCI8 over PDO_OCI. This is partly due to > some inherent design and performance weaknesses of the overall PDO > architecture. > > So, lets not mark PDO_OCI as dead just yet. It's nice to hear that it's not only the pdo_firebird driver that is restricted by PDO. Which why I was asking for a general review on the situation on database access. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk -- Hello, I can definetly make a case that PDO restricts MySQL too. It lacks a lot of functionality comparing to mysqli. I also found out recently that you can't have a named param appear in a query more than once (an OR case, where 2 fields are compared against sma e value). The more you work, the more you understand that PDO was a hype, that never got finished and got almost abandoned. --- ## #85916 — Lester Caine — 2015-04-23T10:45:54+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/85884#85916 · In reply to: #85915 > чт, 23 Апр 2015, 13:00, Lester Caine : > > > > […] > It's nice to hear that it's not only the pdo_firebird driver that is > restricted by PDO. Which why I was asking for a general review on the > situation on database access. > > I can definetly make a case that PDO restricts MySQL too. It lacks a lot of > functionality comparing to mysqli. I also found out recently that you can't > have a named param appear in a query more than once (an OR case, where 2 > fields are compared against sma e value). The more you work, the more you > understand that PDO was a hype, that never got finished and got almost > abandoned. Now that is that sort of feedback I was not expecting ... I don't use MySQL so to see that it has some inherent problems with PDO as most of the other databases is news. I think PDO is probably now too embedded in some projects to roll back but certainly it's limitations need to be better documented? Some of it's restrictions can not be solved by changes to the code, they are incompatible with the base format, but there is nothing explaining that. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk --- Next page: https://externals.io/message/85884.md?page=2