SQL Server 2005

[Michael Rys]

I think that the addition of XML datatypes, XML Schema collections,
XQuery to the relational databases are aimed exactly at these type of
problems.

You can deploy and manage all your data with a single DB instead of
having to federate and manage two completely independent silos....

Michael

> -----Original Message-----
> From: http://xquery.com/mailman/listinfo/talk 
> [mailto:http://xquery.com/mailman/listinfo/talk] On Behalf Of Ronald Bourret
> Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2006 11:56 PM
> To: http://xquery.com/mailman/listinfo/talk
> Subject: Re:  SQL Server 2005
> 
> Frank Cohen wrote:
> 
> > Where I have a problem is with complex XML documents like 
> those  created 
> > using UBL for ebXML solutions. When a service or 
> application  receives 
> > an XML document containing hundreds-to-thousands of  
> elements, lots of 
> > nesting, and many different schema versions then I  think 
> its time to 
> > look at adding an XML database to the datacenter.
> 
> This is an interesting problem.
> 
> One assumes that the business applications involved are 
> already based on 
> relational databases, so what happens when you stop supplying those 
> applications with their data? Do you rewrite the applications to use 
> native XML technology? Build a relational wrapper over the data, in 
> effect shredding it at the query level instead of the storage 
> level? Or 
> are these simply brand new applications built from the ground up?
> 
> (The one argument you've made so far that would strongly push me into 
> the native camp is many schema versions, which seem to be 
> more painful 
> in the relational world than the native XML world, although still 
> painful nonetheless.)
> 
> Out of curiousity, what is the nature of the documents? In 
> particular, 
> how deeply are they nested (excluding wrapper elements that 
> wouldn't map 
> to relational structures)? Do they contain repeating high-level 
> structures, such as a document containing multiple sales 
> orders, which 
> would be easily split into many smaller documents? And how 
> much of the 
> data simply provides context and doesn't need to be stored in the 
> database? For example, a sales order would probably include customer 
> information, but there's a good bet this is already in the database.
> 
> -- Ron
> 
> _______________________________________________
> http://xquery.com/mailman/listinfo/talk
> http://xquery.com/mailman/listinfo/talk
>