> [1]
>
> I've managed to get Oracle XE installed, but I'm having trouble
> getting cx_Oracle in place, so I can't run the test suite yet. I'm
> going to keep at it, but if you have any hints on how to get
> cx_Oracle in place (on a 64-bit machine) I'd appreciate some help.
> Ideally, packages for Ubuntu would be nice.
If you can give me a specific error message, I might be able to help out.
> [2]
>
> I've pushed a branch that adds some details about getting Oracle XE
> installed on a 64-bit machine to the README file and makes some
> cosmetic changes to make the code match the Storm coding style more
> closely. Please merge:
>
> lp:~jkakar/storm/oracle-support-tweaks
I'll look at them. Thanks!
> [3]
>
> Why isn't the builtin reserved words functionality being used?
I don't recall the *exact* reason why I did that, but there was some issue with the reserved word keylist considering words to be reserved that weren't. Perhaps a better solution would be to update the reserved word list. It's a bit dated (SQL 1992).
> [1]
>
> I've managed to get Oracle XE installed, but I'm having trouble
> getting cx_Oracle in place, so I can't run the test suite yet. I'm
> going to keep at it, but if you have any hints on how to get
> cx_Oracle in place (on a 64-bit machine) I'd appreciate some help.
> Ideally, packages for Ubuntu would be nice.
I found this blog post to be a good help: http:// catherinedevlin .blogspot. com/2007/ 10/cxoracle- and-oracle- xe-on-ubuntu. html ... Although note that they're a little bit outdated. I don't believe it's necessary to install the XE patch.
If you can give me a specific error message, I might be able to help out.
> [2]
>
> I've pushed a branch that adds some details about getting Oracle XE
> installed on a 64-bit machine to the README file and makes some
> cosmetic changes to make the code match the Storm coding style more
> closely. Please merge:
>
> lp:~jkakar/storm/oracle-support-tweaks
I'll look at them. Thanks!
> [3]
>
> Why isn't the builtin reserved words functionality being used?
I don't recall the *exact* reason why I did that, but there was some issue with the reserved word keylist considering words to be reserved that weren't. Perhaps a better solution would be to update the reserved word list. It's a bit dated (SQL 1992).