Kenneth Downs wrote:
Select title
,SUBSTRING(text ...insert regexp here...)
from chapters
where book_name = 'XML in a Nutshell'
Regexps can't do that though. Regular expression are an insufficiently
powerful tool for processing XML. Trying to do that is just a world of
pain.
Rusty, you appear to be arguing from ignorance, very unusual coming from
you.
Funny how you confuse different experiences with ignorance. Have you
ever worked in publishing? Or in library science? Or on anything that
operates at web scale like Yahoo or Google? There are many use cases
where a couple of months of hard labor will rapidly disabuse anyone of
the belief that relational databases are the one true solution to all
problems. Your career just happens not to have taken you down those
paths yet.
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.
Ken, you know me. Do you really think I don't know the relational model
or what it's good for? I use relational databases all the time, and I'm
using them now. However unlike you I've hit their limits. While I'm sure
many people can profitably spend their life doing nothing but relational
databases, I happen to be working on applications where neither the
relational model nor the actual SQL databases out there can come close
to managing my data. I've never said that all applications should use
XML databases or other non-relational systems, You keep trying to put
those words into my mouth. I do say that some applications, especially
in publishing and web publishing, do not fit the relational model well
and can better served by XML databases.
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.
XML is not a file format. We've been down this road before. A native XML
database is no more based ona file format than MySQL is based on tab
delimited text.
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.
Troll. Troll. Troll.
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.
LOL. Seriously, try storing a book or an encyclopedia in a relational
database with anything approximating 1NF, not even 2NF. Then try and
make it perform adequately.
Not all data fits neatly into tables.
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".
Average prices, or adding a field, can be done pretty fast. I don't know
if it's as fast as oracle or MySQL. I don't much care. Sales systems are
exactly the sort of apps that relational databases fit well. But
actually publishing the books? That's a very different story.
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.
Just surf around Safari sometime. Think about what it's doing. Then try
to imagine doing that on top of a relational database.
Think about combining individual chapters, sections, and even smaller
divisions to make new on-off books like Safari U does. Consider the
generation of tables of contents and indexes for these books.
Closer to home, think about a blogging system or a content management
system. Now imagine what you could do if the page structure were
actually queryable, and not just an opaque blob in MySQL somewhere.
--
Elliotte Rusty Harold [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Java I/O 2nd Edition Just Published!
http://www.cafeaulait.org/books/javaio2/
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0596527500/ref=nosim/cafeaulaitA/
_______________________________________________
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
