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

[John Anderson]

Eric Gerlach wrote:

> 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?

It looks to me like ZODB is a front runner for influencing and eventual 
Python standard for transparent persistence 
(http://www.python.org/sigs/persistence-sig/)

>
> 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?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Eric
>
> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>
> Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev