[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ozone & modularity
- To: ozone-dev@ozone-db.org
- Subject: Re: ozone & modularity
- From: Lars Martin <lars@smb-tec.com>
- Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 14:06:34 +0100
- Cc: jmvanel@industrysuppliers.com
- Delivered-To: softw7-ozone-db:org-ozone-dev@ozone-db.org
- In-Reply-To: <01020513594301.00464@sheepy>
- Organization: SMB GmbH
- References: <3A75EF64.74093DB7@free.fr> <01013011504403.00465@sheepy> <3A7E5085.5BD4885F@free.fr><01020513594301.00464@sheepy>
> > Please tell us !
>
> Currently ozone uses a straight forward solution to store XML: one DOM node is
> one database object. We encountered several problems with this. The questions
> is, waht is our goal with ozone/XML? If we just want to provide a foundation on
> which all possible XML tools should be able to run, then a persistent DOM is a
> must. If we decide to provide also query and other advanced features, then we
> are free to choose whatever kinf of storage seems to be suited. Taking in
> acount the great development speed of XML and related specs, IMO option two is
> not realistic. So we need a persistent DOM again. Am I right so far?
>
> Today each node is an database object. The other extreme is to put one entire
> document into one database object. Which will lead to other problem IMO. So the
> best way to go is to split up one document into clusters of DOM nodes. The
> problem here is to find a way to make the crossover from one to another cluster
> transparent to the consumer of the DOM.
First thoughts of a new architecture were published here:
http://www.ozone-db.org/ozone-users/08-2000/msg00076.html
Lars
--
______________________________________________________________________
Lars Martin mailto:lars@smb-tec.com
SMB GmbH http://www.smb-tec.com