3 ms·
have individual tables, indeces and views that are either relational or document-oriented, or graph- or object-based while we're at it, on a case-by-case basis
by vog 17y ago
have individual tables, indeces and views that are either relational or document-oriented, or graph- or object-based while we're at it, on a case-by-case basis
This is already the case. Nowadays, almost all relational databases (except, of course, MySQL) support XML columns. PostgreSQL supports them rudimentary, and DB2 and MSSQL have even special storage strategies and index structures for XML, i.e. for generic tree structures, data-oriented as well as document-oriented ones.
Also, abstract data types ("encapsulation", the base of OO) are implemented in these databases, too (except, of course, in MySQL), as well as other OO features such as table inheritation and some kinds of polymorphism.
- derefr 17y agoI'd love to see a comparison between using these XML engines for queries and NoSQL, then. I'm betting they'd be competitive at least to the point that, if you already had one of the supporting DBMSes set up, there would be little point in training your DBA on NoSQL as well.