Re: Object-relational impedence
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 18:49:27 +0100
On Thu, 6 Mar 2008 15:04:16 +0000, Eric wrote:
> On 2008-03-06, Dmitry A. Kazakov <mailbox_at_dmitry-kazakov.de> wrote:
>> On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 14:27:58 -0800 (PST), topmind wrote:
>>> Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 11:34:05 +0000, Eric wrote:
>>>>> On 2008-03-04, Dmitry A. Kazakov <mailbox_at_dmitry-kazakov.de> wrote:
>>>>> I don't believe that merely using an RDBMS will solve all problems. What
>>>>> I meant was that, accepting what David said above, if you keep your data
>>>>> in an RDBMS, it will be easily available for the solution of any
>>>>> possible problem that can be solved using that data.
>>>> No, this as well is wrong. Keeping "data" in RDBMS puts certain
>>>> restrictions on what can be stored there and how it can be used later.
>>> A RDMBS
>>> cannot stop you from doing anything you want to with retrieved data.
>> Yes, exactly this is wrong. (I hope you don't have in mind retrieving all
>> content and continuing without RDBMS.)
> > This is how any database-using program works - it retrieves the _relevant_ > data and does what it needs to do with it.
I wrote about "all" in order to exclude an argument to completeness. If it is not all, then "anything" does not apply.
(Simple example: a stream can be accessed randomly only if all read.)
I.e. the argument is wrong.
-- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.deReceived on Thu Mar 06 2008 - 18:49:27 CET