Hi,

How do you manage schema evolution with Matisse or Cache?
(update/add/remove of class/attribute/methods/relationships)

Thanks,

Eun

Eun

In Caché you have to recompile your class after adding or removing
members to / from it. That's all. (Well, typically. If you create an
index for a previously existing property in a persistent class then
you need to run the %BuildIndices class method to populate the index.)

Wolf Koelling

my_eunchoi (AT) hotmail (DOT) com (Eun Choi) wrote in message news:<d71f7501.0402221604.102e3d6e (AT) posting (DOT) google.com>...

Eun,

In Matisse, you manage database schema with ODL, SQL DDL
or Rational Rose (UML) (whichever you like). Mostly, I
use ODL, but DDL is pretty useful when I need to change
schema dynamically from my application.

You can add/remove properties or SQL methods dynamically
just like you do with relational databases. Your application
does not need recompilation as long as the new schema is
consistent with your application.

Bob Hz

my_eunchoi (AT) hotmail (DOT) com (Eun Choi) wrote in message news:<d71f7501.0402221604.102e3d6e (AT) posting (DOT) google.com>...

Interesting. I've never worked with Matisse but from what I've been
hearing recently (and your post) I'm increasingly getting the
impression that there are a lot of similarities between Caché and
Matisse.

Just to clarify the compilation issue: with Caché you don't need to
recompile your applications that use your class either, it's the class
definition itself that needs recompiling on the Caché server. If you
use Caché as a relational dbms and create / modify tables via Sql DDL
then the class compilation happens automatically in background (as you
don't need to know anything about classes or concern yourself with the
fact that your table is actually a relational projection of a class).
Similarly if you're amending your class definition outside Caché, e.g.
with Rational Rose, then the import into Caché will compile the class
automatically.

Wolf Koelling

bobhz (AT) freemail (DOT) nl (Bob) wrote in message news:<366a1430.0402231023.26847358 (AT) posting (DOT) google.com>...

"Wolf Koelling" <wolf.koelling (AT) slaughterandmay (DOT) com> wrote

The above conditional is absurd. A network model dbms is network model. One
cannot use it as a relational dbms, because it is not a relational dbms.

"Bob Badour" <bbadour (AT) golden (DOT) net> wrote

Hi, Bob Badour, are you fun to spend your time on writing
this kind of non-sense slandering all the time on this
newsgroup?