![]() This sets up an inherent challenge, as now two sets of definitions must be kept up to date as the system grows and evolves, either by "slaving" one to the other (frequently seen by the use of code generation tactics, either from schema to classes or the other way around), or by editing/adjusting the two separately and hand-tuning the mapping between them as necessary. In these situations, an OODBMS back-end can be invaluable in defining and preserving a rich domain model, as now there are no entity definitions in two languages (Java/C# and SQL DDL) to be reconciled." He also identifies the main issue that OODBMS tries to solve as the Dual-schema problem: " in a traditional object/relational world, two sets of entity definitions are in play: one defined by the programming language itself, the other by the relational model using SQL DDL. ![]() ![]() ![]() The main idea that he presents is that Object-oriented Database Management Systems (OODBMS) are better than Relational Database Management Systems (RDBMS) for some applications, for example: "In situations such as "silo" applications where a single user interface accesses a single database (the traditional "baby webapp on top of a big database"), or the more leading-edge "service" implementations, however, all interaction will be through that user interface or service interface, and never against the database itself, thereby making persistence truly an implementation concern only. In a recently released article on, Ted Neward elaborated upon his idea that Object/Relational Mapping (ORM) is the Vietnam of Computer Science.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |