Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Deprecation: dev-local doesn't seem to support in-memory DBs #23

Open
onetom opened this issue Jul 22, 2020 · 1 comment
Open

Deprecation: dev-local doesn't seem to support in-memory DBs #23

onetom opened this issue Jul 22, 2020 · 1 comment

Comments

@onetom
Copy link

onetom commented Jul 22, 2020

I don't quite understand why is this library has been deprecated in favour of dev-local.
I haven't found a way to use dev-local to manage an in-memory DB.
If that's true, then this library is still fulfilling a very important use-case, isn't it?

I did ask about this on the Datomic forum too just now:
https://forum.datomic.com/t/dev-and-test-locally-with-dev-local/1518/11?u=onetom

@kennyjwilli
Copy link
Member

Hi @onetom.

This library was really only intended to bridge the gap of local testing for Datomic Cloud. As Jaret said in his response, Datomic On-Prem already has the tools available to do this sort of thing. Dev-local entirely supersedes this library. It includes the complete feature set the most recent version of Datomic supports (tuples, xform, index-pull, etc). It will also fail in the same ways Datomic Cloud client calls will fail.

dev-local does create and maintain DB data on the filesystem. With a small bit of work, you can make it work just like the in-memory library. We have released dev-local-tu to help with this. As far as I can tell, this will give you everything that you had before with Datomic free + datomic-client-memdb. I have also written a small accompanying blog post on using dev-local for tests. I'd be curious to hear if you hit a particular case this new approach does not cover.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants