Re: XML or a relational Database ?
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2001 16:50:02 -0600
Message-ID: <3aa174e9$0$46002$1dc6e903_at_news.corecomm.net>
We're veering off topic! Yee haw!
When you say "access most of your data sequentially", do you mean that in
any process that needs data, you always start at the beginning of the data
set and read through it to the end? I don't get it.
What about ordering, selecting, combining, summarizing, or comparing data
from various subsets of the database? It's insane to perform those kinds of
operations with only sequential access.
And memory management IMHO is totally separate from databases. Confusing or
mingling the two means trouble. I take it for granted.that my database
software has MM built in.
- cb
Leonardo B Lopes <leo_at_iems.nwu.edu> wrote in message
news:3AA000D6.B1161103_at_iems.nwu.edu...
> DISCLAIMER: Just throwing ideas up in the air. I'll read the two papers
> Carlos and Akmal mentioned, and maybe change my view, but here it goes:
>
> How about the case in which you access most of your data sequentially,
> you write once but read many, there are a lot of data and you don't want
> to deal with Memory Management issues? That is the situation I am in
> now, and I am using an RDB to get around the MM. But the XML libraries
> (I naively assume) have pretty sophisticated MM built into them, so that
> may be an option.
>
> Florian Barbera wrote:
> >
> > Hi !
> >
> > what would you be, according to you, the situation where you would use
XML
> > files (with a XML server if we need it) instead of a relational Database
?
> >
> > Thanks !
> >
> > Florian
>
> --
> =======================================================================
> Leonardo B. Lopes leo_at_iems.nwu.edu
> Ph.D. Student (847)491-8470
> IEMS - Northwestern University http://www.iems.nwu.edu/~leo
Received on Sat Mar 03 2001 - 23:50:02 CET