Re: OODBMS vs. RDBMS
От | Dave Cramer |
---|---|
Тема | Re: OODBMS vs. RDBMS |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 058101c0d594$93ddb2f0$0401a8c0@INSPIRON обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | OODBMS vs. RDBMS (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
Certainly an interesting article. Alot of negative comments about existing OODBMS. Personally I have been using a persistence layer to acheive similiar results on top of postgres. The main drawback is the speed degradation imposed by the persistence layer. The upside is that I have direct mapping into the db, and still maintain SQL compliance for all sorts of adhoc queries. I am intrigued by the notion of an OODBM however. Does anyone know how they do searches, etc. How efficient this is? I realize postgres has the ability to store an object directly into the db, but how would you implement a search, on an attribute of the object, or do multiple index's etc. Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Momjian" <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> To: "PostgreSQL-general" <pgsql-general@postgreSQL.org> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 2:38 PM Subject: [GENERAL] OODBMS vs. RDBMS > There is a Slashdot article and discussion about OO database vs. > relational databases. They mentioned OID right at the beginning. > > They guy mentions six advantages of OO databases and only one > disadvantage, but it is an interesting read to see how the PostgreSQL > features match some of the OO features. > > The main argument is that mapping relational tuples into object-oriented > classed in your application is a pain: > > http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/05/03/1434242&mode=nested > > -- > Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us > pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 > + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue > + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026 > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster > >
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: