[Seaside] Database Integration
brad at sonaural.com
Thu Jun 1 16:48:13 UTC 2006
Ramon Leon wrote:
>> another, this is kind of important. As far as I can tell, at
>> least, Seaside leaves the issue unaddressed. Is that because
>> Smalltalk apps are less likely to *use* databases or because
>> of capabilities built into Squeak/Smalltalk that can be taken
>> advantage of without having to put more code into Seaside or
>> is it in the planning stages or what?
> Bingo.... you can run directly on the image and never "need" a database
> at all, rails wouldn't work without a database. Even when using a
> database, object databases tend to be par for the course, rather than
> relational, so it still feels like running right out of the image and
> the db stuff is out of the way.
Still, it seems that a separate dB would provide a nice way of accessing
different types of data, large quantity of data, and a good backup system.
Am I wrong in thinking this? Let's say you need to store audio data
and/or video data. This can become quite large.
What architecture are you suggesting when you recommend object dBs?
More information about the Seaside