Mariano 

why 1Gb and not tomorrow afternoon 5 Gb and in two days 10 Gb?
Of course Pharo is limited and I hope that with the new Cog it will be 
different but soon it will not fit in the ram of your OS. 

Stef



> On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]> wrote:
> Mariano,
> 
> On 02 Oct 2013, at 20:49, Mariano Martinez Peck <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > Hi guys.
> > First, let me apologize for the amount of emails I am sending. I am doing 
> > an analysis to see if GemStone is a good candidate for a project I am 
> > working and so it deserves some research.
> >
> > I wondered if any has ever tried porting any of these tools to GemStone: 
> > Fuel, Glorp, Native PostgreSQL driver, Voyage and MongoDB.
> 
> I do not understand.
> 
> IMHO there is only one reason to go to Gemstone, and that is to use its 
> capabilities as OODB. All the technologies you mention are persistency 
> related and would not be needed in that case, right ?
> 
> More or less. Fuel would be awesome to move data between Pharo and GemStone. 
> SIXX has demonstrated some limitations. 
> And regarding Glorp / native postgres driver  and Voyage/Mongo is because 
> what I may store in GemStone is not the only DB in the game. I may have OTHER 
> DBs that for a reason not important here, should remain either in a relation 
> DB or in Voyage. Yet, I need to query them somehow from Pharo. Of course, I 
> can have a Pharo image that does the job and provides web-services (or 
> anything similar) to my GemStone....but of course it is easier if these DB 
> clients would work in GemStone as well....
>  
> 
> As you most probably know, you can get pretty far with Pharo.
> 
> Yes I know. But this particular application may have a lot of data 
> processing, algorithms, etc, which may probably NOT fit in 1GB of memory and 
> the effort to distribute the process among multiple images could be high.  
>  
> After that, there is load-balancing, partitioning, message queues. Pretty 
> much what any technology stack does.
> 
> 
> Indeed. But I would still need a persistency solution that satisfy all my 
> needs. I should write this down and compare the alternatives in Pharo. 
>  
> You will always find more tools and libraries on the Pharo side, as the 
> community is much larger.
> 
> 
> Sure. But at least I would only miss the "deployment" libraries, since in any 
> case I will continue developing in Pharo, so all the development tools and 
> all the environment will be the same. 
> 
>  
> Thanks for the discussion!
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Mariano
> http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

Reply via email to