csnyder wrote:
On 8/8/07, Elliotte Harold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Some relational databases have added non-relational, fulltext search
extensions to their products just as some have added non-relational XML
extensions. These are adequate for simple uses, if you don't push them
too hard. However they are completely incapable of carrying out queries
like, "Give me the title and first paragraph of every chapter of this
book" (something Safari routinely does) because they don't see the
structure of a document, only the text.
Select title
,SUBSTRING(text ...insert regexp here...)
from chapters
where book_name = 'XML in a Nutshell'
Rusty, you appear to be arguing from ignorance, very unusual coming from
you.
The true difference between us in this argument is that I understand
that I have a prejudice for relational over hierarchical, based on my
knowledge and use of both, and based on judgment calls as to how to get
through the day. I daresay however that you are promoting a religious
favoring of XML w/o a working knowledge of the alternatives.
You simply cannot defend a file format as a foundation for frameworks
and databases. The best you can do is defend the model, such as the
hierarchical model.
Going further, you cannot defend a file format as a foundation for
anything based on how it handles large text (or binary) fields. There
are three issues here:
-> Data model, hierarchical vs. relational.
-> File format, XML vs YAML or JSON or any other format you like
-> Handling of large text (and binary) columns.
Finally, if we can all admit that XML is just a file format, then the
entire framework crumbles as soon as somebody comes up with a better
one, because let's admit it, XML is just about the worst you're going to
find.
In conclusion, the examples you provide appear to give advantage to XML
because tools exist to handle data that has been buried in opaque
formats and poorly defined structures. If the data had been structured
properly in the first place and put into formats that were not so
opaque, using (pardon me for saying) a *real* database, designed on
solid principles, the examples you give become child's play.
I'm glad we have multiple tools to bring to bear on this kind of
problem, because I worry about the performance implications of
querying an XML database for the average price of those books, or
performing an operation that adds another field (tag?) to each book's
"record".
If it's not too much trouble, could you give us some other use cases
for an XML database? Because title and first paragraph, if that's
something a system "routinely does" could easily be stored as
relational data at the time of import.
--
Kenneth Downs
Secure Data Software, Inc.
www.secdat.com www.andromeda-project.org
631-689-7200 Fax: 631-689-0527
cell: 631-379-0010
_______________________________________________
New York PHP Community Talk Mailing List
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
NYPHPCon 2006 Presentations Online
http://www.nyphpcon.com
Show Your Participation in New York PHP
http://www.nyphp.org/show_participation.php
