Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On 2/15/2012 3:23 PM, Michael Kay wrote: > One of the reasons O2 was a great project was that it took input from > the functional database research rather than (as with other object > databases) merely trying to be a persistent object-oriented > programming language. > > Michael Kay > Saxonica I worked on one of those (ONTOS) for a few years - it was my first real job, and it always seemed that we were struggling to find viable applications for it (and customers!) Looking back now, I think the big missing link was a query language: something really data-oriented seemed to be called for. Instead ONTOS provided persistent C++ collection data structures and assumed that would be sufficient, but it wasn't, and it was just too hard to optimize every conceivable kind of C++ access to remote storage. Our most successful competitor, Object Design, had developed a memory-mapped storage that seemed to be the best thing going in that arena, but even still I don't think it really handled joins and indexing as well as RDBs had been doing for years. -Mike
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
