Re: Possible bridges between OO programming proponents and relational model
Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2006 06:18:01 -0400
> Thanks for the response...
> <<You don't have to worry all that much about what the relational model
> or doesn't allow. As anybody here can tell you, there are no pure
> relational databases in the Real World. >>
> I am puzzled by this
> statement...Everything in my experience teaches me that the current SQL
> implementation have recurring problems because they actuall y do not
> support correctly relational concepts...
Like what problems? Can you give a few examples?
> <<What we have is quasi-relational table-based systems that in fact can
> processes very well. >>
> What do you exactly mean by handling processes
> very well? Most systems I face dayly, present grave performance and
> administration problems that could be avoided if rules dictated by
> normalization were respected...
You clipped it all out. I said that being able to specify transformations and automations would do the trick. That's how we do it here at SDS.
There are some exceptions that require hoop-jumping, but they are thankfully very rare.
> <<Table-centric systems can. >>I see...What exactly are table centric
> systems...Do you mean SQL based systems (ORACLE, DB2, SQL Server)
> My concern is about how OO mechanisms could be utilized to allow better
> physical implementation of relational concepts...Is Java a potentially
> language than SQL for data manipulation, data definition (or
> both)...Thanks for your input...
I went the other way myself, putting more abilities into the server and using less OO, and it has served our company and our customers well.
-- Kenneth Downs Secure Data Software, Inc. (Ken)nneth_at_(Sec)ure(Dat)a(.com)Received on Thu Jun 01 2006 - 12:18:01 CEST