Re: Need help to understand difference, and contrast between Relational database model and the Object-Oriented model

"Corey Brown" <corey_at_spectrumsoftware.net> wrote in message news:<i6KBb.11541$4t2.8346_at_bignews4.bellsouth.net>...

> > > Alfredo, why don't you explain to us why you think this answer is
> > > nonsense.
> >
> > Because it is evident for anybody with a grasp on data management.
>
> This is exactly the type of answer that I would expect from somebody
> like Bob B. Why must you guys always answer direct questions with
> inappropriate remarks like this.

You didn't asked why it is nonsense, you asked why I don't explain that. I answered appropiately to your direct question.

> If you have the knowledge and the
> ability to express that knowledge to others, why don't you take a
> few minutes out to lay down some cold hard facts, instead of just
> telling us to go educate ourselves?

Among other things because a few minutes are not enough if you don't have a clue, but I gave very good bibliography.

> Why can't you step up to the
> role of teacher and start explaining why you "think" one technology
> is better than another?

I can, but I don't want. To know that is the duty of any professional. BTW we are talking about models, not about technology.

>
> >
> > > I am also pretty sure
> > > that ODBM
> > > systems do use direct pointers to relate objects together.
> >
> > And I am pretty sure that SQL DBMSes use pointers internally.
>
> So your point about network databases being obsolete and discredited
> doesn't count here? If using internal pointers is so foul, why doesn't
> it
> apply to your last statement? I know, I know go educate yourself.

You don't know the difference between the logical and the physical levels, you are more ignorant than I thought.

> > So they are based in a primitive obsolete and discredited approach.
> > That's all.
>
> So what! There are many many examples of technologies that have
> been eclipsed by better designs. It doesn't mean that the
> early designs are not practical or useful anymore.

If the new approach is better in all situations then the old approach is not useful anymore.

> > Perhaps in very special circumstances when the flaws of the current
> > SQL DBMSes are more important than the network model inherent flaws,
> > and the flaws of the concrete OODBMS implementations.
>
> I don't think the circumstances are all that special.

Because you ignore the fundamentals of the data management field.

> And I certainly
> hope
> that application architects are looking at more than just the flaws
> associated
> with specific db technologies

There are many application architects that ignore the funtamentals of data management.

The implementation flaws are the only reason that could make more appropiate a tool based on an inferior approach.

The very first implementations of superior technologies are often worse at practice than the older products.

> > Me too, but I try to base my decisions on accurate information.
>
> Ok, but certainly you're not basing your decisions purely on the
> theoretical
> disadvantages of an ODBMS over an RDBMS.

This thread is about a theoretical question: the differences between the relational and the OO approaches, but it seems you don't distinguish very well between model and implementation.

> The whole picture of
> how the application will be used, how much data will be stored, how it
> will be retrieved, the complexity of the data relationships and the
> environment that
> the application must work in must also be taken into account.

The complexity plays against the network approach.

> My own automobile is theoretically and practically inferior to a new
> hybrid
> vehicle, but does that mean I have to stop using my car today just
> because
> better technology is available?

No, but if the new technology is actually better we should stop making traditional cars.

> I firmly believe that both ODBMS and RDBMS technologies have areas in
> which
> each may excel over the other.

And your belief is based on ignorance and inaccurate information.

> years, so believe me when I tell you that I have seen more than my fair
> share of applications
> where the technology was decided on before the requirements were
> analyzed, with the
> end result being a miserable failure.

Again, The Relational Model and The Network Model are not technologies, they are models.

Regards
  Alfredo Received on Thu Dec 11 2003 - 17:56:47 CET