Re: How are OO databases doing
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 22:41:48 -0500
Message-ID: <873biljnk3.fsf_at_wolfe.cbbrowne.com>
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw when "Arturo Hernandez" <arthernan_at_hotmail.com> would write:
> I am not trying to stir even more controversy. Just go on to the
> next posting if you think my question is not genuine. I just have
> been looking back into the OO database technology lately and I want
> to hear honest opinions to aid my judgement.
One trouble is that OO is somewhat lacking in common theory.
Each language's favoured object model tends to be quite different, with two results:
- There isn't usually a "calculus of objects", you just have "Here's how this OODBMS links to this, the one language that it supports", and
- Usually, only one language will be decently supported, as supporting multiple languages' object models would require supporting each object model badly.
So you have some C++ OODBs, some Java OODBs, and such.
They tend to amount to a way of serializing objects in the favoured language.
It can get "multi-language" if you reimplement a not-really-interoperable variation in some other language. <http://www.prevayler.org/wiki.jsp?topic=PrevaylerPortsToOtherLanguages>
-- select 'cbbrowne' || '_at_' || 'gmail.com'; http://linuxfinances.info/info/lsf.html Rules of the Evil Overlord #43. "I will maintain a healthy amount of skepticism when I capture the beautiful rebel and she claims she is attracted to my power and good looks and will gladly betray her companions if I just let her in on my plans." <http://www.eviloverlord.com/>Received on Wed Feb 15 2006 - 04:41:48 CET