[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: Indexing solution for native XML database

• To: "'Peter Hunsberger'" <peter.hunsberger@g...>
• Subject: RE: Indexing solution for native XML database
• From: "Michael Kay" <mike@s...>
• Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 18:30:04 -0000
• Cc: "'Ken North'" <kennorth@s...>, <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <cc159a4a0511300735x4e09bfcs3901d1e2647d315b@m...>
• Thread-index: AcX1w69l4rAl9I3wTa2jybD3NIALMgAFzsoA

> > Celko often writes about this approach to prove that it can 
> be done, but it
> > just goes to convince me that it shouldn't be done.
> >
> 
> Ok, I'll bite: care to explain?  Is it just the simple forms of
> adjacency list you don't like or all nested set approaches?

Relational databases work well when rows in tables correspond to objects in
the real world. If you need to design your own data structures to represent
graphs, lists, trees and the like, then it's interesting to know that it's
feasible to map such structures onto bags/sets of tuples, but this doesn't
make it my preferred implementation technique. I don't see what I gain by
having to model all my data using this very limited set of structures. Celko
is showing how you can do multiplication using a system that only supports
addition, and thereby convinces me that I'm better off using a system that
can do multiplication.

Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Indexing solution for native XML database
    • From: Peter Hunsberger <peter.hunsberger@g...>

• References:
  • Re: Indexing solution for native XML database
    • From: Peter Hunsberger <peter.hunsberger@g...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Common Word Processing Format
• Next by Date: Re: Indexing solution for native XML database
• Previous by thread: Re: Indexing solution for native XML database
• Next by thread: Re: Indexing solution for native XML database
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread