[Dev] ZODB is not a Storage Technology (Re: other formats )

[Eric Gerlach]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

At 12:16 PM 03/11/02 -0800, Michael R. Bernstein wrote:
 >The ZODB is not in and of itself a Storage technology. It is a Python
 >object persistence layer, that has a pluggable storage back-end.

Woah there Micheal.  I never once mentioned ZODB.  If we fix our
thinking in terms of the technology, we lose sight of the real design
issues, which have nothing to do with choosing technology.  If all you
have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

My diagram was designed to show that whatever abstraction Chandler
data takes should have its own layer.  There's no need to diagram the
internals of ZODB... if you like, replace "Data" in my diagram with
"ZODB".  That would be closer to what I intended, but I still think we
shouldn't bind ourselves to particular technologies until we know what
we need them for.  I can cite some hilarious post-mortem comments on
projects that have failed because they chose a technology before they
knew that it was what was needed.

Cheers,

Eric
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (MingW32)

iD8DBQE9xYuunuiuBLkZNokRApOUAKDl/3tod8ePNSHHIKuw72Kx5LcIewCgrjiG
KBW1iczN6wjJXdAcUG9oVuI=
=57XN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----