Flawed JDO Points the Way to the "Objectbase"
Subject:   Apples to Apples?
Date:   2002-04-26 05:43:44
From:   balesd
Response to: Apples to Apples?

First, UDTs (Oracle or not) are portable because they are part of the SQL:1999 standard which has been implemented by vendors other than Oracle. Second, the use of Java is no more portable that the use of Oracle. Both are portable only because implementations of the core software, the DBMS for Oracle and JVM for Java are provided for most operating systems. So there's nothing *non-portable* about UDTs of Oracle. Third, the lack of the ability to do navigational access only exists in the weakness of the SQLData interface. Oracle's ORAData interface provides this kind of capability.

Most importantly though, you missed my point altogether. You seem happy to continue to use and object-oriented programming language to build software and to use relational technology to store data. That means you're not using the fundamental strengths of object-orientation to place both data and behavior together in a persistence layer where it is accessible to all programming languages. In effect, you're using a *non-portable* Java only solution to the business problems you're solving with the software you're writing. Continuing to use relational technology when mature object-relational technology exists is a disservice to the customers for which we are writing software.

1 to 2 of 2
  1. Apples to Apples?
    2002-04-29 14:35:18  perrin [View]

  2. Jonathan Gennick photo Apples to Apples?
    2002-04-26 18:56:39  Jonathan Gennick | O'Reilly AuthorO'Reilly Blogger [View]

1 to 2 of 2