Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Development Trends in Web and Oracle

Re: Development Trends in Web and Oracle

From: Hexathioorthooxalate <ruler_at_removemetoemail.clara.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 15:42:08 -0000
Message-ID: <1110728518.20543.0@echo.uk.clara.net>


> And the purpose of my original example was ...?
> And my frequent references to i/o were ...?
> And my frequent references to extra bytes were ...?

Most if not all of what you have said comes down to perceived unacceptable overhead because of XML verbosity. And what I have said all along is that I agree it is verbose. And what I have said all along is that there is more to XML that the size of the stream. I have said that if middleware processes are talking XML too, by having an XML aware database you can avoid an impedence mismatch between the middleware and the database. I have said too that XML offers a very effective and often thorough mechanism of data validation. And does this validation carry a cost? .

Does data validation of XML against a schema carry cost. Yes. Does data validation in data stored relationally in stored procs etc carry a cost. Yes.

Ie, manipulating data in a database has a validation overhead and this overhead is not something idiosyncratic of XML!

You may not like it Daniel but this **is** a development trend in Web and Oracle. And this is the subject title of all the messages in this thread.

Hex

"DA Morgan" <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:1110725806.82580_at_yasure...
> Hexathioorthooxalate wrote:
>
>> "DA Morgan" <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message
>> news:1110673496.867880_at_yasure...
>>
>>
>>
>>>Then you had better go back to Computer Science 100 and learn what XML
>>>is. XML tags are not the data. And not once have you addressed, I
>>>presume intentionally, the issue I originally raised which is the
>>
>>
>> Obviously XML ***TAGS*** are not data. Obviously. And it don't write like
>> I'm a fool stating the obvious - you haven't mentioned the word "TAGS" up
>> till now.
>
> And the purpose of my original example was ...?
> And my frequent references to i/o were ...?
> And my frequent references to extra bytes were ...?
>
> I didn't think I had to.
>
> And XML is the tags. What isn't the tags is what we call data and what
> we store relationally.
> --
> Daniel A. Morgan
> University of Washington
> damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
> (replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
Received on Sun Mar 13 2005 - 09:42:08 CST

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US