On Jan 27, 10:37 am, Andreas Kostyrka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Ok, I'm
completly with you on this: OO db are fine for a part of the
> problem space where you can be sure that you will never need to run
> some quick'n'dirty reports for the boss of your boss.
>
> Problem here, it's hard to be sure if you will need these reports
> before you are in production. Your business department will swear that
> they won't ask you the click through rate for some ads. And then, 2
> weeks after you started production for money, they'll sneak in, and
> ask you "to give them clicks and impressions. Would be nice if you
> could calculate CTR, but if that's impossible, we'll add the
> calculation in Excel".
>
> So basically, the number of systems where you know that you can forego
> reporting is small.
This may be all true for the applications you work on but it's not
true for everyone. In general people either work on applications that
fit well within the relational database mold while others work in
applications that fit well with OO databases. That's why people are
normally in the relational DB camp while others are in the OO camp.
Neither side sees the strengths of the other side or can't see why any
one would use the other the other type. This is unfortunate as when
you don't make a wise choice you are using the wrong tool for the job
and will have to work harder than necessary.
So in the end you can't say one database type is better than the
other. You can only make that claim on a application by application
basis. Although you may be safe having some rules of thumbs for
application domains.
John
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"TurboGears" 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/turbogears?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
