[ORM] - faulting/collections

[Ruslan Zasukhin]

On 12/10/07 4:06 PM, "Ruslan Zasukhin" <sunshine at public.kherson.ua> wrote:

> On 11/10/07 11:32 AM, "Thorsten Hohage" <thohage at objectmanufactur.com>
> wrote:
> 
>>> 
>>> When COLLECTIONS will be PART of DATABASE STRUCTURE (!!!)
>>>     then OR Frameworks will become more and more simple.
>> 
>> yes, but there must be some more things implemented for Valentina5
>> except the collections and inheritance and table methods then ;-)
>> 
>> 
>> BUT what I want to add about "faulting" and collections in DB and ...
>> 
>> When I need "related" object I perhaps get 1000 faults - this means
>> 1000 ULongLong number that needed to be transfered to the client.
>> When I do it in the db-collection way then probably 1000 invoices are
>> transferred and because the positions and reminders are again
>> embedded in collections in a row of the invoice table you probably
>> transfer them, too. ... Hugh way to wast bandwith and a good example
>> to explain novice orm-developers why they should use faults (if the
>> ORM did not automatically).
> 
> Okay, clear.
> 
> Then let me compare this to next Valentina concept.
> 
> Valentina offers what? Right.  BitSet and ArraySet.
> 
> You have on client object Invoice.
>     you want find RELATED items.
>     Valentina return back ArraySet  -- this is N * 4 bytes RecIDs.
> 
> Now if you want access each of that related object you get it by RecID.
> 
> So also looks like low level kind of faulting. Right? :)

And if you have BIG selection, then BitSets start work, and you have even
near to one bit per object, instead of you example of LongLong (8 bytes).


-- 
Best regards,

Ruslan Zasukhin
VP Engineering and New Technology
Paradigma Software, Inc

Valentina - Joining Worlds of Information
http://www.paradigmasoft.com

[I feel the need: the need for speed]