Re: OODBMS vs. RDBMS

Certainly an interesting article. Alot of negative comments about existing
OODBMS. Personally I have been using a persistence layer to acheive similiar
results on top of postgres. The main drawback is the speed degradation
imposed by the persistence layer. The upside is that I have direct mapping
into the db, and still maintain SQL compliance for all sorts of adhoc
queries.

I am intrigued by the notion of an OODBM however. Does anyone know how they
do searches, etc. How efficient this is? I realize postgres has the ability
to store an object directly into the db, but how would you implement a
search, on an attribute of the object, or do multiple index's etc.

Dave

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "PostgreSQL-general" <pgsql-general(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 2:38 PM
Subject: [GENERAL] OODBMS vs. RDBMS

> There is a Slashdot article and discussion about OO database vs.
> relational databases. They mentioned OID right at the beginning.
>
> They guy mentions six advantages of OO databases and only one
> disadvantage, but it is an interesting read to see how the PostgreSQL
> features match some of the OO features.
>
> The main argument is that mapping relational tuples into object-oriented
> classed in your application is a pain:
>
> http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/05/03/1434242&mode=nested
>
> --
> Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
> pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
> + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
> + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>
>