I think the 'new hotness' datastores that seem to be getting popular (CouchDB) are slightly different again, but similar in spirit to OODBs (but not bound to any specific platforms idea of objects).
I went to a walk at JAOO with Jonas from google about their "megastore" which is built on Big Table - interestingly most payload data is stored as blobs of protocol buffers... (I always write "buggers" instead of buffers...) On May 15, 2:38 pm, Christian Catchpole <[email protected]> wrote: > i didn't say *I* agreed with it. :) > > i wonder if you can mix OO and relational concepts into a DB that > supports both? > > the other thing is, row based databases require each field to have > their max length defined. The total spaced used is the sum of the > size of all the columns. With lots of Strings this can be wasteful, > but i guess it's the whole bases of indexes. rowOffset = index * > rowWidth; > > does anyone know if OODBs take the same approach or are they free > form? > > On May 15, 2:28 pm, Michael Neale <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I agree with that - except for the bit about most enterprise data > > suiting a relational model - I think its quite the opposite but years > > of DBA brainwashing has convinced everyone otherwise. Very few uses of > > RDBMS I have seen really make much use of the R bit to good effect (at > > best its just a data quality thing). > > > On May 15, 11:52 am, Christian Catchpole <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > I think there are heaps of reasons including the ones you mention. > > > But I think the main thing is that dev's might like the idea of a > > > clean object DB, but in practice, the data held by an organization > > > does not (or should not) match the objects used by a program. And > > > this data shouldn't be tied to any one app. And relational people > > > will argue that most enterprise data suits a relational model more > > > than an OO one. > > > > Then there is the whole investment in DB technologies, admin, tuning, > > > reporting, backup, replication etc. > > > > I don't know much about OO databases so I can't say how they compare. > > > > On May 15, 6:12 am, Nico <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I'd like to hear the posse discuss why technologies such > > > > ashttp://www.db4o.com/ > > > > has not yet taken over from the traditional Relational Databases like > > > > Oralce, SQL Server, MySQL.. > > > > > Is it because the technology is not mature enough or is it because of > > > > vested interest both political and monetary in large enterprises? --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
