[Cialug] OT?: DBMs

Tony Bibbs tony at tonybibbs.com
Mon Oct 29 11:55:38 CDT 2007

Probably worth also looking at SQLite.


----- Original Message ----
From: Stuart Thiessen <sthiessen at passitonservices.org>
To: Central Iowa Linux Users Group <cialug at cialug.org>
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 11:16:55 AM
Subject: Re: [Cialug] OT?: DBMs

I am curious why?  It was my understanding that if you have equal  
parts of reading and writing, then SQL databases were more recommended  
because the speed of handling transactions both ways and handling  
multiple writes from multiple sources. On the other hand, if you were  
dealing with more reading and only occasional writing (usually from a  
managed source) then a DBM or XML approach were better because the  
"increased complexity" of SQL didn't provide additional benefits over  
DBM or XML. The ability of DBM and XML to store the data like your  
application views it provided a better benefit in terms of speed and  
processing than add the necessary processing to convert your data  
between the application's processing of it and the relational database  
structure. At least that was what my reading so far has indicated.



On 29 Oct 2007, at 11:04 , Jeffrey C. Ollie wrote:

> On Mon, 2007-10-29 at 10:46 -0500, Stuart Thiessen wrote:
>> Also, I am curious if any of you have preferences about which DBM to
>> use? This particular application will be read-mostly and write-
>> occassionally, which as I understand is the strength of a DBM? Which
>> one would you recommend if I am using both python and PHP to connect
>> to that DBM and access the data? Currently, I plan to use python to
>> handle a standalone application access and PHP to provide a web-based
>> access.
> I'd recommend MySQL or PostgreSQL vs. trying to use a DBM library.
> Jeff
> _______________________________________________
> Cialug mailing list
> Cialug at cialug.org
> http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug

Cialug mailing list
Cialug at cialug.org

More information about the Cialug mailing list