durusmail: durus-users: OODB basics
OODB basics
2005-10-08
2005-10-09
2005-10-09
2005-10-09
2005-10-09
2005-10-09
2005-10-09
2005-10-09
2005-10-09
2005-10-09
2005-10-11
2005-10-12
Re: OODB basics
2005-10-11
OODB vs SQL
2005-10-09
2005-10-09
2005-10-09
Re: OODB vs SQL
2005-10-10
Re: OODB vs SQL
2005-10-10
OT: Durus
2005-10-13
2005-10-13
2005-10-13
2005-10-09
2005-10-09
2005-10-09
2005-10-10
2005-10-11
2005-10-11
2005-10-11
2005-10-11
Re: OODB vs SQL
2005-10-11
2005-10-11
2005-10-11
2005-10-12
2005-10-12
2005-10-12
Demo application [was: Re: [Durus-users] Re: OODB vs SQL]
2005-10-13
Re: OODB vs SQL
2005-10-11
Durus basics
2005-10-09
2005-10-09
2005-10-10
2005-10-10
2005-10-10
2005-10-13
2005-10-13
2005-10-13
2005-10-13
Re: OODB basics
2005-10-13
OODB basics
Oleg Broytmann
2005-10-09
On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 12:10:48PM -0400, David Binger wrote:
> The volume of data that is loaded when you load an instance can be
> managed
> by moving bigger (non-key-ish)  data into sub-instances.    For
> representing email
> messages, for instance, you might keep subject and sender in a
> persistent instance
> with all of the other data in a sub-instance.  This is essentially
> the same thing
> as having separate information-rich keys, but it may be easier to
> manage.
[skip]
> I mean a Persistent instance has a direct reference to another
> Persistant instance,
> without going through any application-level  index.  If the situation
> requires following
> chains of several references to get to the object of interest, then
> that is indeed what
> I mean.

   Thank you! I have to spend some time comprehending all this. And before
I fully grok it I will ask more questions, related to Python, pickle,
Durus, persistance...

Oleg.
--
     Oleg Broytmann            http://phd.pp.ru/            phd@phd.pp.ru
           Programmers don't die, they just GOSUB without RETURN.
reply