Re: Flamewar object databases vs. relational databases (was: Unknown SQL)

On Mon, 4 Jun 2001, Marten Feldtmann wrote:

>
>
> Chris Trathen schrieb:
> >
> > I'll add just one comment:
> >
> > I use a simple criteria: The persistence mechanism dictates what type of system
> > you have, object or relational.
> >
> > If you use a RDBMS then you have a relational system, even if you use Smalltalk,
> > Java, C++ over the top.
> > If you use a pure OODBMS, then you have an OO system.
> >
> > No doubt there are always reasons for choosing any approach and I am not passing
> > judgement. In the end the approach chosen will have advantages and
> > disadvantages.
> >
> > Chris Trathen

[snip]

>
> - when using a rdbms and an OO language noone should really do this
> without a framework. Using them one does NOT need 90 minutes
> to write the query and insert sql statements. Very often you
> just say "anObject save" and that's it. The framework does
> the rest.

I have seen Scott Ambler talk about this concept. He has been working with mapping ideas for a long time and his work is often referenced in the literature. The book by Heinckiens also discusses some related issues from a C++ perspective:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0201310139/

>
> - the generation of unique ID's are done in software and not via a
> database specific solution. This does not need any communication
> between client and server (just one access in the beginning) and
> is incredible fast. Sorry to say, that most programmers are not
> aware of such solutions.

Yes, Ambler shows a number of solutions to this problem in his white papers and books.

Cheer-up Marten.

akmal

[ ---- OOPSLA 2001 Workshop on "Objects, <XML> and Databases" ---- ] [ http://www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/computing/users/marash/oopsla2001ws/ ] Received on Mon Jun 04 2001 - 13:46:28 CEST