Re: Non-text database theory

On Sep 5, 12:12 pm, Rune Allnor <all..._at_tele.ntnu.no> wrote:
> On 5 Sep, 19:24, jefftyzzer <jefftyz..._at_sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 5, 2:26 am, Rune Allnor <all..._at_tele.ntnu.no> wrote:
>
> > > Hi all.
>
> > > This might be off topic for this group; if so please direct me to a
> > > more
> > > appropriate group.
>
> > > I have 20 years of programming experience (hobby / personal scale)
> > > and
> > > am getting my feet wet with databases for the first time. The project
> > > at
> > > hand needs a database to handle large amounts of data. The data are
> > > measured by sonar and amounts to the hundreds of GB, so one would
> > > prefer to save the data on some binary format to save time on the
> > > text <-> binary conversions.
>
> > > The textbooks I have found on database theory solely deal with text
> > > data, i.e. data that are stored as tables in text files, which I
> > > suppose
> > > is OK for educational purposes.
>
> > > 1) Where can I find material on 'real-life' databases which deal with
> > > the
> > >    storage and handling of binary data?
> > > 2) Are there database implementations which are better suited for my
> > >    application than others? I would like to keep the application
> > > platform
> > >    independent, and use C++ as my programming language.
>
> > > Rune
>
> > Hmmm...there's virtually no limit to the kinds of data a modern RDBMS
> > can store, particularly with the extended type capabilities that came
> > along with the object-relational wave of the last decade. The RMoD
> > certainly doesn't circumscribe (data) types.
>
> I'm a total nephyte on the subject; acronyms are foreign to me.
> RDBMS = Relational DataBase Management System...?
> RMoD = ?
>
> > Anyway, although it sounds like your textbook is using textual
> > attributes in its examples, RDBMSs are quite capable of efficiently
> > storing and allowing you to manipulate binary data. Are you speaking
> > of sonar *images* here, or some other, more fine-grained, measurement?
>
> It's anything and everything. Lots of data, measurements and
> information flowing all over the place; keeping track is a
> full-time job. Literally.
>
> > As to recommended books, I think for what you're working on, stepping
> > away from theory books (not in general, mind you!) and looking for
> > books that are specific to the RDBMS you're working with (which is, by
> > the way, what?) would take you farther on this specific question.
>
> Just looking at options for now. I know what need be done, the
> question is if there are good or bad ways of doing it.
>
> > For books that are more theory-oriented, perhaps _Databases, Types and
> > the Relational Model_ by Date would be of interest to you.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Rune

Yep, you got "RDBMS" right, and "RMoD" = the Relational Model of Data, the body of theory collectively undergirding RDBMS's (note that the vendors' fidelity to the model varies, but that's a story for another day).

--Jeff Received on Fri Sep 05 2008 - 21:21:33 CEST