[Dev] ZODB is not a Storage Technology (Re: other formats )
egerlach at canada.com
Sun Nov 3 14:20:53 PST 2002
At 01:36 PM 03/11/02 -0800, David McCusker wrote:
>Eric Gerlach wrote:
>> At 01:09 PM 03/11/02 -0800, David McCusker wrote:
>> >Does anyone want to lecture on how ZODB works inside?
>> Just a quickie: At this stage, does it matter?
>I don't know. I'm with you in your other message when you say:
>Eric Gerlach wrote:
> > 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.
>However, the general idea of transparent object persistence is a good
>idea, and might be what is wanted without committing to a specific way
>of doing it. I thought I'd understand the context better under Python
>if I heard more about how ZODB does it. I could also go study it online
>elsewhere, but other folks here wouldn't hear informed commentary.
>I could also just try to wing a description of how object persistence
>works in general without paying attention to ZODB. But it risks
>drawing a resounding "we know that already!" if it's what ZODB does,
>and if folks here are presumed familiar with it. (I'm not yet.)
I'll stick my foot in my mouth as punishment for making that extremely out
of context quip then. :)
I agree with you that transparant object persistance is good. However, I
don't see what the particulars of ZODB have to do with it. If I understand
the area properly, most object persistance systems have basically the same
semantics. If that's true then it doesn't matter what system we
choose. As far as I (a user and possible developer) am concerned, I'm not
concerned with the internals of ZODB until I know what the need is. Heck,
it's possible to write our own object persistance system... why not do that?
To make a non-ending with a few questions: Who says we need object
persistance in the first place? Why not a traditional relational
database? Why not an abstract linking datastore?
More information about the Dev