Forum: Ruby on Rails Rails with no direct database access?

Announcement (2017-05-07): www.ruby-forum.com is now read-only since I unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any more. Please see rubyonrails.org/community and ruby-lang.org/en/community for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.
F1d2ebbee526d3e4881e1a9315ab9c1c?d=identicon&s=25 Jason DiCioccio (Guest)
on 2005-12-17 09:20
(Received via mailing list)
Hello all,
  I'm having a bit of an internal conflict here.  I have a web
application that I need to write (for myself).  Fine, right?  Well,
this site is for a DNS service that has a client interface for client
APIs to access.  I'd like to have all application requests and data
updates/retrieval to go through this interface instead of a database.
Should I even use Rails for something like this?  Or is using Rails
for something without an RDMS not worth it?  Is replacing or
subclassing ActiveRecord (which I heard is what I'd be doing) very
time consuming?  Worth it?  I'd like to use Rails, but if this
architecture is not feasable using Rails, then are there any other
ruby frameworks that anyone could recommend?

Thanks in advance!
Jason DiCioccio
Aac37a62e0fb883cef1f37e25f1044d9?d=identicon&s=25 Frederic Jean (Guest)
on 2005-12-19 06:45
(Received via mailing list)
I wrote a small (internal) application that retrieved data in XML
format from another application. I had no database involved. Even
then, Ruby and Rails were a good fit for this nice little hack. The
method_missing method is your friend here.

Fred

On 12/17/05, Jason DiCioccio <geniusj@gmail.com> wrote:
> architecture is not feasable using Rails, then are there any other
> ruby frameworks that anyone could recommend?
>
> Thanks in advance!
> Jason DiCioccio
> _______________________________________________
> Rails mailing list
> Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
>


--
Frederic Jean
fredjean@gmail.com
D2b2017098da3e2fd1cdcfbb72ecdbfb?d=identicon&s=25 Jason Edgecombe (Guest)
on 2005-12-19 16:23
(Received via mailing list)
Jason DiCioccio wrote:

>architecture is not feasable using Rails, then are there any other
>ruby frameworks that anyone could recommend?
>
>

Why not subclass activerecord or make a custom database connector? That
way you get ActiveRecord/Rails goodness while still using the custom API
that you want.

I'm a rails newbie, but I suspect that subclassing ActiveRecord may be
the better approach. What say the rails gurus?

Besides, if you wrap your custom api in an existing Rails API,then you
can reuse it in another app or switch your data store without much fuss.
Abstraction is a good thing.

Sincerely,
Jason
8e44c65ac5b896da534ef2440121c953?d=identicon&s=25 Ezra Zygmuntowicz (Guest)
on 2005-12-19 20:21
(Received via mailing list)
On Dec 17, 2005, at 12:18 AM, Jason DiCioccio wrote:

> architecture is not feasable using Rails, then are there any other
> ruby frameworks that anyone could recommend?
>
> Thanks in advance!
> Jason DiCioccio
> _______________________________________________
> Rails mailing list
> Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
>

	I think you will find that rails is perfect for this sort of thing.
Rails does not force you to use ActiveRecord. So you can make your
models howerver you want and still get to use rails controllers/views
and routing. I don't think you will want to subclass activerecord
though. just write your own custom model classes.


Cheers-
-Ezra Zygmuntowicz
Yakima Herald-Republic
WebMaster
http://yakimaherald.com
509-577-7732
ezra@yakima-herald.com
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.