durusmail: durus-users: Demo application [was: Re: [Durus-users] Re: OODB vs SQL]
OODB basics
2005-10-08
Oleg Broytmann
2005-10-09
David Binger
2005-10-09
David Binger
2005-10-09
Oleg Broytmann
2005-10-09
David Binger
2005-10-09
Oleg Broytmann
2005-10-09
Oleg Broytmann
2005-10-09
mario ruggier
2005-10-09
David Binger
2005-10-09
David Binger
2005-10-11
mario ruggier
2005-10-12
Matthew Scott
Re: OODB basics
2005-10-11
Michael Watkins
OODB vs SQL
2005-10-09
Oleg Broytmann
2005-10-09
Oleg Broytmann
2005-10-09
Oleg Broytmann
Re: OODB vs SQL
2005-10-10
Michael Watkins
Re: OODB vs SQL
2005-10-10
Michael Watkins
OT: Durus
2005-10-13
Oleg Broytmann
2005-10-13
David Binger
2005-10-13
Oleg Broytmann
2005-10-09
John Miller
2005-10-09
David Binger
2005-10-09
Oleg Broytmann
2005-10-10
David Binger
2005-10-11
mario ruggier
2005-10-11
A.M. Kuchling
2005-10-11
Roger E. Masse
2005-10-11
Roger E. Masse
Re: OODB vs SQL
2005-10-11
Michael Watkins
2005-10-11
Michael Watkins
2005-10-11
David Binger
2005-10-12
Michael Watkins
2005-10-12
mario ruggier
2005-10-12
Michael Watkins
Demo application [was: Re: [Durus-users] Re: OODB vs SQL]
2005-10-13
mario ruggier
Re: OODB vs SQL
2005-10-11
Michael Watkins
Durus basics
2005-10-09
Oleg Broytmann
2005-10-09
David Binger
2005-10-10
Oleg Broytmann
2005-10-10
David Binger
2005-10-10
Oleg Broytmann
2005-10-13
Oleg Broytmann
2005-10-13
David Binger
2005-10-13
Oleg Broytmann
2005-10-13
mario ruggier
Re: OODB basics
2005-10-13
Oleg Broytmann
Demo application [was: Re: [Durus-users] Re: OODB vs SQL]
mario ruggier
On Oct 12, 2005, at 2:12 PM, Patrick K. O'Brien wrote:
> Michael Watkins wrote:
>> * mario ruggier wrote [2005-10-12 08:40:43 +0200]:

>>> Patrick, could this be the basis of a comparison between various
>>> implementation scenarios? It is rather relational in nature
>>> though...  if
>>> we define what the test application should do, then whoever wants can
>>> implement the test to those speces.
>>
>> This example as described so far is really so simple and trivial,
>> except for
>> the volume of data. However it could be made somewhat more complex:
>>
>> Symbols trade on Exchanges, Exchanges are frequently in different
>> Countries
>> with different Currencies. Symbols have different Aliases depending
>> on who
>> the data provider is (i.e. Reuters, Bloomberg, Yahoo, eSignal, DTN,
>> etc all
>> may have a different symbol for the "Dow 30 Industrials Index").
>>
>> Symbols belong to Indexes - collections of similar securities,
>> arranged
>> either by Sector or by Style (large cap, mid cap, small cap etc) or by
>> Geography (emerging markets, US and other country indexes).
>>
>> Some Symbols might be "calculated" symbols, in that their end of day
>> values
>> are as a result of some computation; indexes are a simple example of
>> this -
>> all symbols from the NYSE exchange could be summed in such a way to
>> create a
>> composite index. Another example of a calculated index would be to
>> determine
>> how many symbols hit new 52 week highs for the trading session being
>> examined, and store that data as "quotes" such that it can be plotted
>> and
>> analysed. Or calculate how many symbols are trending up, trending
>> down, and
>> not trending at all.
>>
>> Quote records are an indication of what price was at the end of the
>> trading
>> session; but specific events such as Splits change what the meaning
>> of past
>> data is, particularly if one needs a continuous split-adjusted set of
>> data.
>
> Now we're talking!  Those additions would be great.

Yes, we can evolve this to an interesting demo and test application.
The problem though is to make the above additions would necessitate
modifying and adding data. The "dynamic" stuff may be enough,,, and
might show-off some nice techniques with using OODBs.

Otherwise, I would opt for a simple generally understood application,
such as a TaskManager as you suggested, or a Forum. I'd prefer the
2nd...

mario




reply