Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: "Matthew Sergeant (EML)" <Matthew.Sergeant@eml.ericsson.se>
- To: "'firstname.lastname@example.org'" <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 15:49:57 +0100
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Prescod [SMTP:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> "Matthew Sergeant (EML)" wrote:
> > > You need to store data that is efficiently maintained relationally.
> > > need to *transmit* XML. Why not use a relational database and create
> > > when you need it.
> > >
> > That's not always the best (or possible) solution either.
> I didn't claim it was. You cited a particular case where the data was
> naturally relational. I said: "then use a relational database."
> There is no universal architecture. You must choose the best one for your
> application. If the data is relational, store it in a relational database.
Oh - that's a lesson that's learned in the first few days of
application development. The issue wasn't that the data is strictly
relational, it's just that my experience with relational databases makes me
think this would be faster using an RDBMS. (or and OODBMS, or object
serialization, or... you get the picture?)
The point is - XML fits our problem domain perfectly well. It's just
not fast when parsing directly. Ultimately we may have to turn the
architecture on it's head - store in a database (relational or OO) and
transmit XML to the client. If they want to edit the XML by hand, transmit
some to them, and parse the results back into the database. This will be a
disappointment to me, but not the end of the world.
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:email@example.com
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org)