Lists Home |
Date Index |
3/6/2002 12:17:27 PM, "Marksman" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>What is faster ?
>a XML bases database or a mySQL database ?
>i want to use it for the web. I think mySQL is
>faster, because its written excpecially for such
>this jobs. Its this true, or is XML faster (serverside parsing) ?
I'm not quite sure what you are asking. There is a common
misconception that an XML document can substitute for a database.
That's true only in the very narrow sense that XML can
easily represent some common business "data" formats such
as invoices, orders, and catalogs that would require
multiple database tables, and a DBMS that at least supported
the relational join operation, to handle. The limitations
of doing this in the filesystem are obvious -- limited
queries, no transactions, no backup/restore or other administration.
A mySQL-based application would almost certainly be faster and
"better" once any substantial amound of data was put in the system.
On the other hand, there is a class of products called "native XML
databases" (NXDB) that DO support (as a general rule) the features of
any database system, but use XML documents and interfaces rather
than tables and SQL. Whether an NXDB or an RDBMS is more suitable
to a particular application is highly dependent on the details of
the application. As a general rule, the more "data-like" the data,
i.e. easily "shredded" to a manageable number of tables, the more
appropriate the RDBMS will be; the more "document-like" the data
(with deep recursion, mixed content, and irregularity in general),
the better an NXDB solution will be. Also, if your data is shared
by other RDBMS applications, the RDBMS solution is generally preferred;
if your data is used by other XML applications, an NXDB is preferred.
At the high end, the distinction is blurred because all the major
RDBMS vendors are promising "native" XML support Real Soon Now, but
as far as I know, mySQL has nothing to ease the burden of working
with XML on top of its tables and interfaces.