I did try Takusen with PostgreSQL and it worked perfectly for me, too.
The only reason I'm using HDBC is because there was already a
HaskellDB HDBC driver. I was considering writing a Takusen driver for
HaskellDB, in fact (if possible).

Anyway, the point remains, we need a single goto database library. I
don't know if Takusen's left-fold typeable way of doing things is
different enough to disqualify it from The Great Merge or not. Though
the lack of response to this thread makes me think no one particularly
thinks this is a problem. Is it worth the effort having one very high
quality stable library instead of three fairly okay
not-really-that-different maybe-working libraries?

On 7 July 2010 19:29, Gregory Crosswhite <gcross@phys.washington.edu> wrote:
>  I've been using Takusen for all of my database needs, which most of the
> time means interfacing to a PostgreSQL database, and it has worked out
> pretty well in practice.  In fact, I experimented with hsql and HDBC a while
> back and for some reason I can't remember they turned out to be less
> convenient than Takusen so I changed the code I was working on back over to
> Takusen.
>
> Cheers,
> Greg
>
> On 7/7/10 2:17 AM, Nick Rudnick wrote:
>>
>> Hi Chris,
>>
>>
>> these are good questions -- actually, you might have mentioned Takusen,
>> too.
>>
>> Clearly, HDBC is the largest of these projects, and there are lots of
>> things well done there.
>>
>> Takusen has an interesting approach, and I would like to see a discussion
>> here about the practical outcomes, as I have done no testing yet.
>>
>> I myself quite a time ago had an opportunity to do a Haskell job with a
>> PostgreSQL backend for a client, where I tried out all three and got hsql
>> running easiest. A maintainer was vacant, so I stepped in happily -- doing
>> refactorings, fixing problems at request, giving advice to people.
>>
>> I can say that I am quite a little PostgreSQL centric and that I have a
>> GIS project in sight, for which I want to try to adapt hsql.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>>   Nick
>>
>>
>> Christopher Done wrote:
>>>
>>> One thing that would be nice is a unification of the general database
>>> libraries hsql and HDBC. What is the difference between them? Why are
>>> there two, and why are there sets of drivers for both (duplication of
>>> effort?)? I've used both in the past but I can't discern a real big
>>> difference (I used the hsql-sqlite library and the HDBC-postgresql
>>> library, whichever worked...). It seems the best thing to do is either
>>> actively merge them together and encourage the community to move from
>>> one to the other -- judging from what I've read HDBC is more up to
>>> date and newer than hsql -- or have some documentation with damn good
>>> reasons to choose one or the other, because currently this is a
>>> needless source of confusion and possible duplication of effort for
>>> Haskell's database libraries.
>>>
>>> I wasn't going to post until I'd actually researched the difference
>>> myself properly but I didn't get chance to have a look over the
>>> weekend, but I thought I'd pose the question. Do people actually care
>>> about this?
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
>>> Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
>>> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
>> Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
>> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
>
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe