Re: Object-relational impedence

On 2008-03-04, Dmitry A. Kazakov <mailbox_at_dmitry-kazakov.de> wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 23:03:41 +0000, Eric wrote:
>
>> On 2008-03-03, Robert Martin <unclebob_at_objectmentor.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> There is indeed more to it than that. OO and RDB are both strategies
>>> for partitioning data.
>
> No. OO stands for modeling, that might include data being modeled or
> serving as models. It also might mean absence of data. In short, data are
> irrelevant.
>
>>> However, the motivation behind the partitioning
>>> is completely different. OO partitions data based on the way a
>>> particular application will process that data. RDBs partition data
>>> based on how many different applications will need to access that data.
>>
>> No, RDBs partition data so that it is sensibly and easily available to
>> any possible application. So if you use OO you are saying "there will
>> never be any other application that will need my data".
>
> No, it is engineering which says so. It translates as "put the requirements
> first," or simpler "pigs do not fly."
>

So no-one ever says "we should be able to get that stuff out of the xyz application and combine it with our data so that we can..."!

E Received on Tue Mar 04 2008 - 16:41:40 CET