On Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 12:42:58AM -0700, Brian wrote: ... > Finally, if you are going to start using databases, you may as well use > Postgresql because it is a database you can grow into.
I too need a database, but for huge amount of information, think of three annotated natural language dictionaries:) The nice thing of PostgresSQL is that you have a powerfull query language, so you don't have to program each and every usage. But.. ...the disadvantage is that you have to use that query language. You see, those dicts are to be used in a natural language translation system, so *fast* access is essential in that particular usage, and that access is rather simplistic, just retrieve the entry on a single key, so there the power (and overhead) of SQL queries is not needed. So the big question is: Does anyone know whether it's possible to bypass the SQL layer in PostgresSQL? I've read that mySQL is based on Berkely db, so there it should be possible, but people seem to like Postgres better, and I certainly want to make it a bit more future proof this time around (the program has been ported with the usual problems al least 3 times before:). -- groetjes, carel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
