RE: XML design of Database

Subject: RE: XML design of Database
From: "admin" <admin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 12:26:50 -0400
Hi, Liam:  What's that mean, "forthcoming"?  Hurry your book up, would you?  Ya haveta watch these books, cause they tend to wander around.  Get it out there, we're ready and waiting.  Thanks, Tom

---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "Liam R. E. Quin" <liamquin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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.
>Liam Quin, Barefoot Computing, Toronto;  The barefoot programmer
>Ankh on,
>co-author, The XML Specification Guide, Wiley Inc.
>forthcoming: The Open Source XML Database Toolkit, Wiley, 2000
> XSL-List info and archive:

Thomas A. Poe, M.D., Director
The World Center For Clinical Research
2044 Plumas Street Reno, NV 89509-3708
Phone: 775-829-1799

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread