OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: [xml-dev] XML and the Relational Model [long]

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, Thomas B. Passin wrote:

> Just sloppy language on my part, I know that "relational" does not mean a
> storage format.  I did not really mean storage of bytes, but was thinking of
> the logical (or conceptual, if you like) level.
> For example, it is easy to model a two-level hierarchy in SQL, but it is
> awkward to model (and query) a hierarchy of an indefinite number of levels.
> So when the data model is deeply hierarchical, xml structures might have an
> advantage.

When you are thinking in terms of these, I think you should definitely see
some of the best practices for hierarchical model. For example, look up
any of the editions of
"Fundamentals of Database Systems" by Elmasri/Navathe

Jonathan Robie has worked on non-relational stores for XML, hopefully he
can give a non-salesperson and convincing perspective, as to when
non-relational store performs better than using relational stores..

note: relational store: storage model used for relational DBs..

cheers and regards - murali.

> If the data model is sparse, xml may be much better than a table-like model.
> Similarly when the contents of an element type may vary quite bit from one
> instance to another.
> On the other hand, if you create a well-normalized data model to begin
> with - when that is practical - you could probably implement it either with
> xml or with a relational database.  What are the differentiators between
> going one way or the other?


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS