|
| 1 | +# Driver Extensibility Guide |
| 2 | + |
| 3 | +ObjectQL is designed to support multiple database backends through its **Driver** abstraction layer. This guide explains how to extend ObjectQL with additional database types. |
| 4 | + |
| 5 | +## Current Official Drivers |
| 6 | + |
| 7 | +ObjectQL currently provides official support for: |
| 8 | + |
| 9 | +| Driver | Package | Databases Supported | Status | |
| 10 | +|--------|---------|---------------------|--------| |
| 11 | +| **SQL Driver** | `@objectql/driver-sql` | PostgreSQL, MySQL, SQLite, SQL Server | ✅ Production Ready | |
| 12 | +| **MongoDB Driver** | `@objectql/driver-mongo` | MongoDB 4.0+ | ✅ Production Ready | |
| 13 | +| **SDK/Remote Driver** | `@objectql/sdk` | HTTP-based ObjectQL servers | ✅ Production Ready | |
| 14 | + |
| 15 | +## Potential Database Types for Extension |
| 16 | + |
| 17 | +ObjectQL's Driver interface can theoretically support any database system. Here are common database types that could be implemented: |
| 18 | + |
| 19 | +### Key-Value Stores |
| 20 | + |
| 21 | +| Database | Use Case | Implementation Complexity | |
| 22 | +|----------|----------|--------------------------| |
| 23 | +| **Redis** | Caching, real-time data, pub/sub | 🟢 Low - Simple key-value operations | |
| 24 | +| **Memcached** | Distributed caching | 🟢 Low - Basic get/set operations | |
| 25 | +| **etcd** | Configuration management, service discovery | 🟡 Medium - Hierarchical keys | |
| 26 | + |
| 27 | +### Document Databases |
| 28 | + |
| 29 | +| Database | Use Case | Implementation Complexity | |
| 30 | +|----------|----------|--------------------------| |
| 31 | +| **CouchDB** | Multi-master replication, offline-first | 🟡 Medium - Similar to MongoDB | |
| 32 | +| **Firebase/Firestore** | Real-time sync, mobile apps | 🟡 Medium - Cloud-native features | |
| 33 | +| **RavenDB** | .NET integration, ACID transactions | 🟡 Medium - Advanced indexing | |
| 34 | + |
| 35 | +### Wide Column Stores |
| 36 | + |
| 37 | +| Database | Use Case | Implementation Complexity | |
| 38 | +|----------|----------|--------------------------| |
| 39 | +| **Cassandra** | High availability, time-series data | 🔴 High - Distributed architecture | |
| 40 | +| **HBase** | Hadoop ecosystem, big data | 🔴 High - Complex data model | |
| 41 | +| **DynamoDB** | AWS-native, serverless | 🟡 Medium - Single-table design patterns | |
| 42 | + |
| 43 | +### Search Engines |
| 44 | + |
| 45 | +| Database | Use Case | Implementation Complexity | |
| 46 | +|----------|----------|--------------------------| |
| 47 | +| **Elasticsearch** | Full-text search, analytics | 🟡 Medium - Query DSL mapping | |
| 48 | +| **OpenSearch** | Fork of Elasticsearch, AWS managed | 🟡 Medium - Similar to Elasticsearch | |
| 49 | +| **Algolia** | Hosted search, real-time indexing | 🟢 Low - REST API based | |
| 50 | +| **Meilisearch** | Typo-tolerant search | 🟢 Low - Simple REST API | |
| 51 | + |
| 52 | +### Graph Databases |
| 53 | + |
| 54 | +| Database | Use Case | Implementation Complexity | |
| 55 | +|----------|----------|--------------------------| |
| 56 | +| **Neo4j** | Social networks, recommendation engines | 🔴 High - Cypher query language | |
| 57 | +| **ArangoDB** | Multi-model (graph + document) | 🟡 Medium - AQL query language | |
| 58 | +| **OrientDB** | Multi-model graph database | 🟡 Medium - SQL-like syntax | |
| 59 | + |
| 60 | +### Time-Series Databases |
| 61 | + |
| 62 | +| Database | Use Case | Implementation Complexity | |
| 63 | +|----------|----------|--------------------------| |
| 64 | +| **InfluxDB** | Metrics, IoT, monitoring | 🟡 Medium - Time-based queries | |
| 65 | +| **TimescaleDB** | PostgreSQL extension for time-series | 🟢 Low - SQL compatible | |
| 66 | +| **Prometheus** | Monitoring and alerting | 🟡 Medium - PromQL query language | |
| 67 | + |
| 68 | +### NewSQL Databases |
| 69 | + |
| 70 | +| Database | Use Case | Implementation Complexity | |
| 71 | +|----------|----------|--------------------------| |
| 72 | +| **CockroachDB** | Distributed SQL, PostgreSQL compatible | 🟢 Low - PostgreSQL protocol | |
| 73 | +| **TiDB** | MySQL compatible, horizontal scaling | 🟢 Low - MySQL protocol | |
| 74 | +| **YugabyteDB** | PostgreSQL compatible, cloud-native | 🟢 Low - PostgreSQL protocol | |
| 75 | + |
| 76 | +### Cloud-Native Databases |
| 77 | + |
| 78 | +| Database | Use Case | Implementation Complexity | |
| 79 | +|----------|----------|--------------------------| |
| 80 | +| **AWS DynamoDB** | Serverless, auto-scaling | 🟡 Medium - NoSQL patterns | |
| 81 | +| **Google Cloud Firestore** | Real-time sync, mobile | 🟡 Medium - Document-based | |
| 82 | +| **Azure Cosmos DB** | Multi-model, global distribution | 🟡 Medium - Multiple APIs | |
| 83 | +| **Supabase** | PostgreSQL-as-a-service | 🟢 Low - PostgreSQL protocol | |
| 84 | +| **PlanetScale** | MySQL-compatible, serverless | 🟢 Low - MySQL protocol | |
| 85 | + |
| 86 | +### Columnar Databases |
| 87 | + |
| 88 | +| Database | Use Case | Implementation Complexity | |
| 89 | +|----------|----------|--------------------------| |
| 90 | +| **ClickHouse** | OLAP, analytics, data warehousing | 🔴 High - Column-oriented queries | |
| 91 | +| **Apache Druid** | Real-time analytics | 🔴 High - Complex aggregations | |
| 92 | + |
| 93 | +### Embedded Databases |
| 94 | + |
| 95 | +| Database | Use Case | Implementation Complexity | |
| 96 | +|----------|----------|--------------------------| |
| 97 | +| **LevelDB** | Embedded key-value store | 🟢 Low - Simple operations | |
| 98 | +| **RocksDB** | High-performance embedded DB | 🟢 Low - LevelDB-compatible | |
| 99 | +| **LMDB** | Memory-mapped key-value store | 🟢 Low - Fast read operations | |
| 100 | + |
| 101 | +## Implementation Complexity Guide |
| 102 | + |
| 103 | +- 🟢 **Low Complexity** (1-2 weeks): Database has SQL compatibility or simple REST API, straightforward query mapping |
| 104 | +- 🟡 **Medium Complexity** (3-6 weeks): Custom query language, moderate feature mapping required |
| 105 | +- 🔴 **High Complexity** (2-3 months): Distributed systems, complex data models, significant architectural differences |
| 106 | + |
| 107 | +## Choosing a Database to Implement |
| 108 | + |
| 109 | +When deciding which database to add support for, consider: |
| 110 | + |
| 111 | +### 1. **Use Case Alignment** |
| 112 | +- Does the database solve a specific problem for ObjectQL users? |
| 113 | +- Does it complement existing drivers? |
| 114 | + |
| 115 | +### 2. **Community Demand** |
| 116 | +- Is there active interest in this database? |
| 117 | +- Are there existing GitHub issues requesting it? |
| 118 | + |
| 119 | +### 3. **Technical Feasibility** |
| 120 | +- How well does the database's data model map to ObjectQL's abstraction? |
| 121 | +- Does it support required operations (CRUD, filters, sorting)? |
| 122 | + |
| 123 | +### 4. **Maintenance Burden** |
| 124 | +- Is the database actively maintained? |
| 125 | +- Does it have a stable API? |
| 126 | +- Is there good documentation? |
| 127 | + |
| 128 | +### 5. **Ecosystem Maturity** |
| 129 | +- Are there quality Node.js/TypeScript clients? |
| 130 | +- Is the client library actively maintained? |
| 131 | + |
| 132 | +## Recommended First Extensions |
| 133 | + |
| 134 | +Based on community needs and implementation complexity, we recommend prioritizing: |
| 135 | + |
| 136 | +1. **Redis Driver** - High demand, simple implementation, excellent for caching |
| 137 | +2. **Elasticsearch Driver** - Popular for search features, clear use case |
| 138 | +3. **DynamoDB Driver** - AWS ecosystem, serverless applications |
| 139 | +4. **ClickHouse Driver** - Analytics and reporting use cases |
| 140 | + |
| 141 | +## Getting Started |
| 142 | + |
| 143 | +To implement a custom driver: |
| 144 | + |
| 145 | +1. Review the [Driver Implementation Guide](./implementing-custom-driver.md) |
| 146 | +2. Study existing driver implementations: |
| 147 | + - [`@objectql/driver-sql`](../../../packages/drivers/sql/src/index.ts) - SQL databases |
| 148 | + - [`@objectql/driver-mongo`](../../../packages/drivers/mongo/src/index.ts) - MongoDB |
| 149 | +3. Review the [Driver Interface](../../../packages/foundation/types/src/driver.ts) |
| 150 | +4. Follow the [Driver Testing Guide](./testing-drivers.md) (coming soon) |
| 151 | + |
| 152 | +## Community Drivers |
| 153 | + |
| 154 | +We encourage the community to create and maintain third-party drivers for additional databases. If you've implemented a driver, please: |
| 155 | + |
| 156 | +1. Follow the ObjectQL driver conventions |
| 157 | +2. Include comprehensive tests |
| 158 | +3. Document configuration and usage |
| 159 | +4. Submit a PR to add your driver to this list |
| 160 | + |
| 161 | +### Publishing Community Drivers |
| 162 | + |
| 163 | +Name your package following the convention: `@your-org/objectql-driver-<database>` |
| 164 | + |
| 165 | +Example: `@acme/objectql-driver-redis` |
| 166 | + |
| 167 | +## Need Help? |
| 168 | + |
| 169 | +- 📖 Read the [Driver Implementation Guide](./implementing-custom-driver.md) |
| 170 | +- 💬 Join the [ObjectQL Discord](https://discord.gg/objectql) (if available) |
| 171 | +- 🐛 [Open a GitHub Issue](https://github.com/objectstack-ai/objectql/issues) |
| 172 | +- 📧 Contact the maintainers |
| 173 | + |
| 174 | +## Related Documentation |
| 175 | + |
| 176 | +- [SQL Driver Documentation](./sql.md) |
| 177 | +- [MongoDB Driver Documentation](./mongo.md) |
| 178 | +- [Driver Interface Reference](../../../packages/foundation/types/src/driver.ts) |
0 commit comments