您可以在生产系统中使用对象数据库吗？
对象数据库很少被使用，尽管它们提供了一种无需 SQL 的方式，我认为这本身就是一个好处。
然而，我几乎从未在生产系统中见过它们。 对象数据库有什么根本性的错误吗？ 我可以在生产系统中使用对象数据库吗？
编辑：所以，也许我应该承认我喜欢对象数据库。 我实在无法理解为什么它们没有被更频繁地使用。
Object-databases are used very seldomly, albeit they offer a way to live without SQL, which is, I think, a benefit of its own.
Yet, I have seen them about never in production systems. Is there something fundamentally wrong with object-databases? Can I use a object-database in a production system?
Edit: So, maybe I should confess that I love object-databases. I cannot really get my head around why they are not used a lot more often.
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（6）
我认为问题在于 SQL 本质上并不是一件坏事。 它非常擅长执行基于集合的操作。 据我所知，对象数据库在处理单个对象时工作得很好，但在尝试执行基于集合的操作时却失败了。 此外，人们非常擅长使用 SQL 数据库。 很容易找到与他们一起工作的人。 对象数据库则是另一回事。
The problem I believe, is that SQL isn't inherently a bad thing. It is very good at performing set based operations. From what I've seen, object databases work well when working with individual objects, yet fail when trying to do set based operations. Also, people are very good at working with SQL databases. It's easy to find people to work with them. Object databases are another story.
当然可以，只要稳定就可以。 问题是相对缺乏高质量的面向对象数据库系统，而且大多数人甚至不知道它是什么。
Sure you could, as long as it was stable. The problem is the relative lack of high quality Object Oriented DB systems, as well as the fact that most people don't even know what one is.
db4o 正在 被许多财富 500 强公司大量使用（尤其是嵌入式应用程序），所以我不会说 OODB 不用于现实世界的生产系统
db4o is being used a lot by many Fortune 500 companies (especially for embedded applications), so I wouldn't say that OODBs are not used for real-world production systems
有使用 GemStone OODB 编写的生产系统。 它是一个分布式、持久的 Smalltalk 系统。
There are production systems written using the GemStone OODB. It's a distributed, persistent Smalltalk system.
听说过缓存吗？ 由 EpicSystems 用于其企业健康记录 (EHR) 产品。 很多生产车间都在使用它。
Heard of Cache? Used by EpicSystems for their Enterprise Health Record(EHR) product. Plenty of production shops using it.
这里真正的问题是您是否需要工具来支持您的数据库。 我所说的工具是指报告、数据迁移、数据挖掘等。您需要提供自助服务报告吗？ 哎呀，甚至不需要部署新代码的快速周转时间的报告？ （在应用程序中提供报告功能确实很麻烦。）
有无数工具可用于针对传统 RDBM 执行这些操作。 反对 OODB？ 我对任何主要产品都不熟悉。 不过，诚然，我不是一个 OODB 类型的人。
如果您不需要这些工具，他们就会使用。 否则，请坚持使用传统的 RDBM。 使用当前的 ORM 技术，将对象映射到记录的痛苦比以前少了很多。
The real question here is whether you require tooling to support your database or not. By tooling I mean reporting, data migration, data mining, etc. Do you need to provide self service reports? Heck, even reports with a fast turnaround time that doesn't require deploying new code? (Providing report functionality in the application is a real drag.)
There are countless tools available to perform these operations against traditional RDBMs. Against OODBs? I'm not familiar with any major products. Though, admittedly, I'm not an OODB kinda guy.
If you don't need those tools, they go for it. Otherwise, stick to traditional RDBMs. With current ORM technology, the pain of mapping objects to records is much less than it used to be.