Question for those that can load and use 2.3.9

[Geert Janssens]

On Tuesday 23 February 2010, Kevin Buckley wrote:
> >> I think he was asking if the XML store is going to continue on as a
> >> back end storage option for the foreseeable future.
> 
> Is he though?
> 
> There is surely a difference between where an "Undo" would happen
> during an invocation of  GnuCash, ie within the "GnuCash Engine",
> currently, I believe, still a set of in-memory structs, and where one
> would choose to keep one's data between invocations of  GnuCash.
> 
> > Oh!  Certainly for the 2.4 series and probably even the 2.6 series
> > (where it will no longer be the default).  But beyond that I'm hoping
> > XML gets relegated to an interchange format where it's best suited.
> 
> So one would have to have compile/install against a database just to
> be able to use GnuCash at all? Or not?
> 
No, people that prefer to use a file to store their data will be able to use 
the sqlite data format. sqlite is a-database-in-a-file sort of thing. So it 
combines best of both worlds.

So for the user nothing really changes, only the internal format of their data 
file will be sqlite instead of xml. This is not something an ordinary user 
would worry about.

The mysql and postgresql backends are for users requiring more advanced usage, 
like access from different computers or easier interaction with other 
applications. All these options come with limitations though, like no true 
simultaneous multi-user access, external applactions should only read from the 
db, but it solves some scenarios that were more difficult to realize with the 
xml file.

> >  It works great for (quazi-)static documents, but XML is not a database.
> 
> And the storing of information between invocations of GnuCash is
> not static and so not an area where XML works great ?

sqlite can do that just fine, and should be more efficient.

But xml will stay available as generic exchange format, not as native data 
format (in the long term, I mean).

Geert