Peter Nixon <listuser@peternixon.net> wrote:
This makes sense to me. I think it should be for 2.0 though as changing the name of fields in a DB schema will break compatibility.
I'm not set on changing the name. If it's a problem, we can leave it as-is.
One of my pet peeves is that the mysql config file is called "sql.conf" which tends to confuse non-mysql users the first time around. This should be renamed to mysql.conf (oraclesql.conf should be renamed to oracle.conf also)
Let's fix that.
I think it may even be a good idea to make a raddb/sql/*.conf structure,= either that or maybe we should name the files sql.mysql.conf, sql.postgresl.conf etc. This then allows sqlippool.mysql.conf also. (Alternatively the sqlipool config should go inside the existing sql config files.)
Sure. We can also split the sql.conf file into: sql.conf - global SQL things to the site, which does driver = postgresql trace files... $INCLUDE sql/postgresql.conf for any postgres-specific things. We can nuke the "rlm_sql" prefix from the "driver" config item, and update the code to accept one or the other.
Also, before a 2.0 release I would like to sit down and bring the queries for the different SQL variants as close together as possible as they have gradually diverged over the last few years. (Much of it my fault as I have been continually adding new features to the postgresql schema :-)
Sounds good to me. I have a few other things on my agenda that I'd love to do, like have per-"listen" configuration sections, but I think that's hard. Alan DeKok. -- http://deployingradius.com - The web site of the book http://deployingradius.com/blog/ - The blog