On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 12:08 PM, Waldemar Kornewald
<wkornew...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> No, we don't.  People are desiging there data in ways that fit their
>> datastore. If all people did was implement a relational model in
>> userland code on top of non-relational databases then they'd really be
>> missing the point.
>
> Then you're calling everyone a fool. :) What do you call a CouchDB or
> Cassandra index mapping usernames to user pks? Its purpose it exactly
> to do something that relational DBs provides out-of-the-box. You can't
> deny that people do in fact manually maintain such indexes.


I think there are two very different goals; maybe opposite, maybe complementary:

A: use the _same_ ORM with NoSQL backends.  then it's important to
provide (almos) every capability of the current ORM, even if they have
to be emulated when the backend doesn't provide it natively.

B: create a new ORM-like facilty for NoSQL (lets call it ONoM).  it
would be used mostly the same as the ORM; but with different
performance properties, and some capabilities missing, some others
added, and some available but with 'emulation warnings'.  but in the
end, they should return queryset-like objects, that _must_ be usable
by existing code that take querysets.


IMHO, if the choice between these two isn't make clear and explicit at
start, this kind of arguments won't end.

-- 
Javier

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.

Reply via email to