Quote:
Originally Posted by Garoad
Re-reading the mention of object databases above I should add, after researching the current state of the industry, they aren't quite ready for most applications. So RDBMS is still in charge..
|
"Object database" doesn't have to mean anything different to "Relational database". An object class is a type. In principle an RDBMS supports any type of arbitrary complexity and OO programmers call those types "classes" and they call instances of those types "objects". Even SQL DBMSs these days support complex user-defined types. So "object database" ought to be a solved problem - and it would be so if it weren't for the major deficiencies of the SQL language, for instance SQL's lack of type safety and inheritence. It is SQL limitations rather than any weakness of the relational model that cause OO programmers to look for alternative database solutions.