Re: OO features of Oracle

Just thought I'd send a quick comment on the OODBMS subject--concept great, implementation still lacking maturity (in the pure OODBMS). The client I am working for had me working on an evaluation of ObjectStore vs. Oracle. For a quick sum up of findings, a majority of uses I've seen listed for ObjectStore has been for a query cache for a larger database (pre-join common queries into an object format for use by multiple users). You will have to use the ObjectStore tools and documentation (limited availability of third party tools). Remember that ease of coding does not always mean faster...a poorly designed set of tables, objects, classes, etc. along with hastily written code can kill even the best database (75% of most database performance problems are from the application side--I speak from experience, some of my code from my beginning database developer days gives me the frights). If you go to the Object Options in Oracle, remember you have to purchase additional licensing for that option. The support for it is slowly growing (you can do your design with tools like Rational Rose with Oracle 8 support). Make sure that the development tools that you use support the Oracle Objects properly (I've heard of some minor compatibility problems out there). The implementation of it is pretty easy (just create an object that references both tables and stored procedures that you want in it and then you can reference the persistent data in the table or "methods" through the object). What it really comes down to, should be how comfortable the people maintaining the system feel with the database you choose. How quickly will they be able to respond to performance problems in the different systems? How quickly can they recover the database after a crash? How much exposure do they need to the system to figure out how to size it (unless you want to use the autogrow and let excessive fragmentation into the system that would need to be dealt with)? What is an acceptable response time for resolving issues and which system is most likely to give that to you? There are just a lot of things to consider...

Jeff S

Michael R. Shoop <mshoop_at_zeltech.com> wrote in message news:377C728E.3C705378_at_zeltech.com...
> First, excuse the cross-posting, but I really wasn't sure where this
question
> belongs. It is more along the lines of the theorectical than anything
else.
>
> The company I work for is about to start the second phase of a project,
and the
> programmers are looking for ways to make life easier. To date, the
application
> we are building is object oriented in design and implementation, but tied
to a
> relational database schema, currently Sybase. There is a debate on
whether or
> not to continue to use an RDBMS or jump ship to an object oriented
database,
> such as ObjectStore. Reasons for doing so are: 1.) The belief that the
OODBMS
> will be faster; 2.) The amount of coding needed will be less since the
objects
> the application creates will be stored right into the database. No need
to
> create seperate code for inserting the data into the database; 3.)
Currently the
> application uses client side caching of all the data, which makes keeping
> consistent data among users difficult. ObjectStore has features that will
keep
> client caches in synch. Some reasons not to take this approach are: 1.)
No
> experience with an OODBMS; 2.) No assurance an OODBMS will be faster than
an
> RDBMS with large amounts of data; 3.) Licensing for the OODBMS is very
expensive
> in comparison to an RDBMS. 4.) The users in the field already have dbas
familar
> with Sybase/Oracle; not an OODBMS.
>
> I have tried to make the case for using the OO features of Oracle to
lighten the
> coding problem, while changing the application design to use the database
as a
> means of supporting multi-user functionality.
>
> Has anyone used the OO features of Oracle with success on a large
application
> with lots of data? How was the experience-- good and bad? Is there a
> performance penalty for trying to use Oracle in an object oriented fashion
vice
> a traditional relational approach? If so, how bad was the performance
hit?
>
> I'd appreciate any comments on the topic, especially if you happen to know
what
> the future of OO in Oracle might be. It seemed to be a big issue a couple
of
> years ago, but it seems to have died away.
>
> Thanks for your help,
>
> Mike Shoop
>
Received on Mon Jul 05 1999 - 02:51:15 CDT