Re: What is the logic of storing XML in a Database?
Date: 29 Mar 2007 07:52:35 -0700
Message-ID: <1175179955.104759.220740_at_n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>
On Mar 29, 10:01 am, "David Cressey" <cresse..._at_verizon.net> wrote:
> "JOG" <j..._at_cs.nott.ac.uk> wrote in message
>
> news:1175112245.717262.275350_at_d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > I'm sure there are many people who have been through the same
> > experience as myself using xml as a transport format:
>
> > 1) Observe the popularity of XML and the supporting libraries in the
> > language you are working in.
> > 2) Implement a transport layer using XML to parse messages/data etc.
> > 3) Realise that your server/application is now over ten times slower
> > than it was before.
> > 4) Remove XML and replace with something far simpler, far less verbose
> > and vitally far /quicker to parse/.
> > 5) Curse XML for wasting your bloody time and never let it darken your
> > door again.
>
> There are really two discussions going on in parallel in this thread.
>
> One is about using XML for data transfer outside of a DBMS. I'm saying
> "DBMS" rather than "Database" intentionally here. A DBMS can move data
> across a network link, and even pass it to an inter-DBMS gateway.
>
> The other, the one actually asked by the OP, is about declaring columns of
> type XML in tables.
>
> I use CSV for data tranfer between one DBMS and another, when I don't have
> a workable gateway between the two DBMSes. It works just fine for me, and
> I see no reason to add the complexity of XML.
>
> I see no reason to store XML database inside an SQL table. Perhaps if you
> wanted to keep an accurate record of the incriminating evidence.
> Also, in your precis above, you implicitly refer to the "thundering herd"
> argument. I buy the thundering herd argument as a reason for conforming, at
> times. I don't buy it as the path to excellence. Excellent solutions are
> almost always beyond the reach of the thundering herd.
>
> The trick is to figure out when good enough is good enough, and when it's
> not.
Agreed. But I am afraid that discussing the use of XML or CSV quickly
becomes a sterile debate. I did it in the purpose to trigger some
questions about XML.