fishfry wrote:
> In article <IhjBd.5746$6i.1873_at_bignews6.bellsouth.net>,
> "Tom Dyess" <tdyess_at_dysr.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Yes, I would agree with the relational database. ORDB are mainly hype and
>>usually promoted by coders that have never had to write a report or mine
>>data effectively.
>>
>
>
> Is this really true? I'm an experienced database programmer learning the
> Java/OO way of doing things and I'm puzzled that people use Hibernate
> and similar tools to define objects, with the database serving as just a
> passive serialization mechanism with no thought to database theory. How
> can this possibly work in real life? Also I've been told that stored
> procedures are not supported by Hibernate, is that true? How can it be
> that 20 years of relational theory seems to be getting thrown out
> overnight? Or am I just misinformed?
Well, I'd do it your way. Creating objects based on information returned
from a database query is much better than just storing the object in the
database, because if you do it 'right' other programs can also use the data.
--
-------------
- ByteCoder - ...I see stupid people
-------------
Curiosity *Skilled* the cat
Received on Sun Jan 02 2005 - 05:57:33 CST
