Going very Nosql-ly here ;-) On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 19:23, ChadDavis <[email protected]> wrote: > Perhaps, OT, but wouldn't we still say that if data integrity is very > important, then we still would prefer a well normalized RDBMS to a > object oriented persistence mechanism?
Yes, but that depends on the application. There is nothing wrong by eg. reusing a certain string (eg. "us", "uk", "switzerland") instead of having it as a foreign key to some country table (*). This effectively moves the ownership of the data towards the application (developer) and away from a database maintainer / dba, which is a good thing for fast and flexible application development as experience shows ;-) (*) The implementation can still intern strings to save space, and some parts of jackrabbit do that already. I think normalization is often thought to be absolutely fundamental for any data schema, because it is a central part of RDBMS and this is basically the only thing that was taught the last 20-30 years (went this route myself). But a major reason for normalization was simply the space constraint, it's not fundamental at all. The same story with the ACID constraints... banking accounts are not the only software application nowadays ;-) Regards, Alex -- Alexander Klimetschek [email protected]
