This seems a bit unusual to me that the two projects have such similar
names: "MySQL/Ruby" vs. "Ruby/MySQL".
What seems to add to the confusion, is that the relevant kitebird
article http://www.kitebird.com/articles/ruby-mysql.html has "Ruby
MySQL" in the title, and "ruby-mysql" in the url, but seems to be
written about MySQL/Ruby.
BTW, how does Ruby/MySQL talk to the DBMS? Over port 3306, just like
the mysql client?
Also, that dev.mysql.com page says that Ruby/MySQL is included with
Rails. This means ActiveRecord uses it, right?
Finally, can Ruby-DBI (http://ruby-dbi.rubyforge.org/) use either
MySQL/Ruby or Ruby/MySQL?
On 8/28/06, David Vallner <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
Mer Gilmartin wrote:
> Which is better? Or which should you use for what?
Use the C binding I'd say. It'll be both faster, and the logic is
performed by the "original" MySQL interface library, and because of that
will probably be both more stable and complete.
Use the pure Ruby binding if you have to deploy on a platform where you
can't compile the extension, or where a binary gem isn't available.
(Which leaves only rare edge cases - shell accounts on shared *nix boxes
without GCC, or 64-bit Windowsen.)