20 Jan
2011
20 Jan
'11
12:33 p.m.
Hi,
I strongly recommend NOT to use a relational database. It is a very bad solution for OO
(for several reasons, the best example I read ever is: "is like disassemble your car
every night before sleep, and reassemble it every morning, before going to work"). I
worked with relational databases a lot and I can ensure that it is a pain in the a**. Yes,
with Mariano we did SqueakDBX, but that was just because in lots of jobs the database is
not an option, you must use a relational db (and usually oracle), not because we think it
is good for programming.
Of course, gemstone can be a better solution... but if we want scalability for free, a
nosql solution here can be a good choice (and there are some implementations in pharo, to
choose one)
btw...a document oriented database (like MongoDB, already implemented for Pharo) is a good
approach for non-regular structures.
my 2c.
best,
Esteban
El 20/01/2011, a las 8:22a.m., Stéphane Ducasse escribió:
Query all the versions of a class.
All the difference between to changeset over a stream of changes.
We do not care about relational or not. But we should start somewhere.
Stef
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
in the
past marco did a bridge to database for metadescribed but since famix was not regular we
could not get
famix models in databases.
So I would be interested to know if there is an ongoing effort to do that?
Because this would be a real plus for FameDescribed models. May be using Glorp and I was
thinking that this would be
good also to get all the source code of pharo in a db using Ring.
And get Torch there too.
What do you hope to achieve by having these models in a relational database?