Subject: RE: XML design of Database From: "Liam R. E. Quin" <liamquin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 10:16:01 -0400 (EDT) |
Vun Kannon, David <dvunkannon@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > Andreas' presentation is clear on some things, not on others. > > XML as normalised relational tables means table per element, not table per > nesting level. Er, there is no one true definition, folks :-) One table per document is also fine, and for some applications wil give a thousand-fold or more performance improvement. When you've spent an hour waiting for a document to be served by a million-dollar SPARC running Oracle, you know that the "obvious" relational schema isn't always the most appropriate. In my book (forthcoming) on the subject, I actually seggest that if you have XML documents, you store them outside a database altogether in many situations, using a relational database for metadata such as author's name, and sometimes for extracted data such as a list of parts. Lee -- Liam Quin, Barefoot Computing, Toronto; The barefoot programmer Ankh on irc.sorcery.net, http://www.holoweb.net/~liam/ co-author, The XML Specification Guide, Wiley Inc. forthcoming: The Open Source XML Database Toolkit, Wiley, 2000 XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: XML design of Database, Vun Kannon, David | Thread | "XML design of Database" is out of , XSL-List Owner |
Re: XHTML to WML problem, Henning Behme | Date | RE: XHTML to WML problem, Dylan Walsh |
Month |