Thanks for posting this!

As a Tamino user (we also use 3.x, and while I've played with
4.1 we haven't had time to upgrade yet), I'd just add a couple
of notes:

One major enhancement of 4.1 you don't mention is support for
XQuery. I mean the real W3C XQuery as opposed to the "X-Query"
which, as you point out, is equivalent to XPath 1.0 plus some
extensions and minus some features. I can't speak to how
complete or compliant their XQuery functionality is.

Also, their implementation of XML:DB is just a thin layer on
top of their proprietary client API for Java (a DOM-based
instantiation of it), and can be used with 3.x. I think they
don't actually package it with the product until 4.1, but is
available as a download from their developer community site.

I'd really like to see some performance comparisons! I suspect
where Tamino shines vs Xindice and eXist is performance and
scalability. 

Also the devil with these things, beyond the big picture
features, is in the details. For example, one reason we
haven't upgraded to Tamino 4.1 is it would not support
xsi:type. In 3.1 I can hack the schema to ignore it. In 4.1 it
completely rejects it. There is supposed to be a patch for
this now, but I have not yet tried it. These are the sort of
little support details that can make or break whether a given
XML database works for you--and especially details of what
kinds of indexes the database supports well, and (partly due
to this) what kind of queries does it perform well.

Eric

---- Original message ----
>Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 17:13:16 +0100
>From: Werner Frieb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
>Subject: Report on XML Databases ready  
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Cc: [email protected]
>
>
>Hi list members !
>
>I've just finished a report on XML databases
>http://www.studierstube.org/world/xml_databases_compared.html
>where I've tried to evaluate and compare Tamino - Xindice -
eXist.
>
>Please, let me know what you think and
>send a copy of your answer directly to my e-mail address
([EMAIL PROTECTED]),
>so that I don't miss it.
>
>Merry Christmas !
>
>Werner.
>

Reply via email to