Em 18/02/2010 13:51, Levente Uzonyi < le...@elte.hu > escreveu: > On Wed, 17 Feb 2010, laurent laffont wrote:
[snipped] > > 3. You have a legacy (relational) database, with extensive > > reporting written for it. Use an ORM. > Relational databases are not legacy, they have features which > "modern" key-value stores don't (and won't). ORMs may ease the > programmer's work, but they tend to have bad runtime performance and > can't use (all) the features of todays RDBMSs. > Levente, I think the advice doesn't intend to imply that RDBMSs are legacy _technology_. What I understand from the text is understanding the existence of an application (or a lot of data) already using a RDBMS, and so it is legacy for the programmer with the task at hand. OTOH, if we take the features of the RDBMS is central to task at hand, (and not available to Pharo) or ORM makes performance unacceptable then it may end that Pharo should not contemplated to start with, so the point becomes moot. . . just my 0.019999.... -- Cesar Rabak _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
