MS Access compatibility

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Hi developers, I needed a project similar to yours for an MS Access "DB",
and have ported your code to work with Access.

the changes were relatively minor-- mostly small changes to SQL syntax,
including stuff in the JOINs, string literal operator ("[]" becomes "``")
and ORDER BY clauses, etc.

I also rewrote some of the introspection stuff (that's working for access
too), but it was suited only to my test case.

I was wondering if this (Access compatibility) would be something you were
interested in adding, and if so, I'd be happy to make my initial changes
more generalized and ensure compatiblity with the test-cases.

Anyway, I was wondering if this is something I should fork, or incorporate,
or just let fall by the wayside because it's useful for only a handful of
cases where people can't migrate.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by james%pr...@gtempaccount.com on 5 Feb 2010 at 7:51

[GoogleCodeExporter]

This is something I would be highly interested in.  Care to share your code?

Original comment by andrewa...@gmail.com on 12 Mar 2010 at 5:00

[GoogleCodeExporter]

This issue brings up an interesting design decision. Is django-pyodbc designed 
to be
a universal ODBC driver for Django? Or is it supposed to be primarily for MSSql 
over
ODBC as the "project home" suggests?

Original comment by djfis...@gmail.com on 12 Mar 2010 at 6:28

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Seems to me there are a couple of competing implications at play here - the 
name 
django-pyodbc implies a universal odbc driver, but the project home defines the 
scope 
as MSSQL.  Not that I mean to complain at all about the hard work that other 
people did 
which I am not able to do myself in a short time!  That said, I would love to 
see the 
wrapper grow to include Access, and if "Ja..." already has done the 
heavy-lifting to 
accomplish it, I'd love to take advantage of it.

Original comment by andrewa...@gmail.com on 12 Mar 2010 at 9:17

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Oh great! glad to hear that there's even vague interest in this.

I'll try to get this stuff working with the full test suite, and post once it 
is.

Also, FYI, I didn't know this when I last posted, but Jet/Access has a 
127-column
limit for queries that there's no workaround for (other than making separate
queries). Obviously, this is a design flaw in the Jet driver, not my port, but 
I just
thought I'd let you know.

How should I handle getting the code to you? as diffs? or as a separate module? 
Both
formats might be most appropriate, so you can see what's changed and have the
separate module.

how should I post it/check it in? or should I just send the files to somebody?

Also, for the record, I'd leave the project name as-is, as it helped me find 
your
code, which got me at least 80% of the way to what I needed.

--james

Original comment by james%pr...@gtempaccount.com on 12 Mar 2010 at 10:57

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I'd appreciate both, since you offered!  Just so there's no risk in 
misrepresentation, 
I'm not affiliated with this project, just commenting and highly interested in 
the 
access functionality.  Can you attach as a file in this thread?

Original comment by andrewa...@gmail.com on 15 Mar 2010 at 7:44

[GoogleCodeExporter]

has there been any more progress on this?  would love to get the code if 
possible :) 

Original comment by wakeb0a...@gmail.com on 14 Oct 2010 at 11:29

[GoogleCodeExporter]

So...Nothing happened here?

Original comment by ed...@opticasprada.com on 14 May 2012 at 10:05

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I have read this, but not sure if is what you are looking for:
https://github.com/CBWhiz/django-pyodbc-access

Original comment by cha...@gmail.com on 3 Jan 2014 at 11:37