Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] (no subject)
From: Paul Davis (pbd_AT_op.net)
Date: Tue Jul 23 2002 - 15:00:19 EEST
>Well i don't see it as unnecessary, just for the reason that you NEED
>a database. so any objection is either a practical one or a theorical
>one. Maybe the hidden objection is that it's too complicated for an
>application writer to relationalize his application's data
>model.. Myself i find it difficult to xml-ize data sometimes just for
>the fact that it freezes a certain hierarchy.
there is one important difference.
when you decide that its necessary to change the schema of a
relational DB, its a major change in the setup of things. when you
decide to change the DTD used for an XML file, you haven't actually
done very much, certainly not if the code that uses the results of
parsing is well written.
both methods freeze a given ordering and relationship between the
parts, but the XML one freezes it only till its a bit mushy, the RDB
freezes it till its just about solid.
anyway, i think, as some others have said, that both XML and RDB
choices are completely irrelevant to the discussion unless someone
proposes that a single agent collects the state information and stores
in a single location (i.e. a file or a table). what format or
methodology a given participant application in the project uses to
store its state is not relevant if all the system does is to provide a
standard way to load, restore and collect state together for distribution.
--p
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Jul 23 2002 - 15:11:40 EEST