Re: [Gnue-dev] Object-Relational Mapping

[Jason Cater]

There's a fine line between bridging two worlds, and trying to emulate an 
OODBMS. 

-- Jason 

On Thursday 16 January 2003 03:23 pm, Daniel E Baumann wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2003 at 02:30:43PM -0600, Jason Cater wrote:
> > Since we are sharing articles that have bookmarked, here is an article
> > from a respected relational theorist and practicioner:
> >
> > http://searchdatabase.techtarget.com/tip/1,289483,sid13_gci769023,00.html
> >?FromTaxonomy=%2Fpr%2F284872 (entitled "OO for application development,
> > not database management")
> >
> > He is affiliated with Codd (the originator of Relational database theory
> > in the '70s) and Date (also helped pioneer relational databases.)
> >
> > These guys resumes go well beyond academic theorizing (is that a word :)
> >
> > One interesting point that I read place after place is that the integrity
> > guarantees offered by relational database theory is based on solid
> > mathematical principles -- OODBMS are not; they are just built on
> > supposed market forces.  And relational data models are only as limited
> > in functionality as you make them -- there's nothing that can be done in
> > an OODBMS-paradigm than in a properly designed relational one... however
> > I'd venture to say that the converse of that statement is not true.  Just
> > food for thought.
> >
> > Well, that's my link for the day :)
> >
> > -- Jason
>
> Well the article that I have linked is NOT about creating an OODBMS,
> also the ODMG standard isn't about that either, imho. Relational
> databases have a true data model, but what some ppl would like is to
> not have to worry about doing data modeling but have the middleware
> map the objects for them, i.e., an object-relational layer. The
> article that I linked discusses 3 ways and their pros and cons. He
> says that any middleware you write should implement all 3 and you
> should be able to choose which method you want to use given the type
> of application you are developing taking into account the underlying
> circumstances. This is not an object v. relational war or something,
> but a way to bridge the worlds together.
>
> Dan