Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [json] Re: save my JSON

Expand Messages
  • Tatu Saloranta
    ... Fundamentally there are 2 very distinct major classes of use cases: those where data is mostly or completely access as a single entity (one row, xml/json
    Message 1 of 6 , Apr 15, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 11:41 PM, Michael Schøler <michael@...> wrote:
      >
      > --- In json@yahoogroups.com, Mark Ireland <markincuba@...> wrote:
      > > Is storing a JSON string in a database:
      > >
      > > A: a crap idea. period.
      > > B: a crap idea under most common circumstances
      > > C: pure genius
      > >
      > > Thanks. You've been helpful.
      >
      > Hi Mark,
      >
      > In a major project I'm currently involved in we had to consider how
      > to store client side data and process it server side. JSON was one of
      > the first suggestions. However, the database team (MS SQL 2005) did
      > not like it one bit, because they could not do queries or perform any
      > other programatic access to it "easily". Of course we all know that
      > is not true but remember that JSON is more or less the scariest thing
      > around to anyone other than us web folks.

      Fundamentally there are 2 very distinct major classes of use cases:
      those where data is mostly or completely access as a single entity
      (one row, xml/json blob), and those where one need to deal with sets.
      While RDBMSs aren't even optimal for the first use case, they are
      often used for them too.
      DBAs frown upon "store xml as BLOB" approach, yet that's generally the
      most sensible way to do it: it's much much more flexible, doesn't need
      complicated slice 'n dice logics to fit possibly complicated
      structured data into simple relational model ("square peg through
      round hole"), and inevitable structural changes do not result in
      schema changes. For second case RDBMSs make sense, and it's more of a
      question of how to bind data; json can at most be used as interchange
      formats between data tier and processing (task which it can do better
      than xml although both work ok).

      In the second case, where queryability is needed, native xml databases
      or object DBs would often be more optimal choices, but sometimes one
      just has to work with whatever exists. And chances are that
      corporations just have Oracle instances, independent of whether they
      are good choice for various storage needs or not.

      Personally, more often than not I like yet another combination:
      storing json or xml docs in Amazon S3. But this is due to our use
      cases (storing configuration data in versionable sets) and YMMV.

      Anyway, one final note: the biggest thing IMO that is still mising
      from json world are data binding tools: for Java, equivalents of JAXB
      and Hibernate (binding between json and objects/relational model,
      respectively).
      Once those exist, interoperability will be much easier to deal with
      for most common cases.

      -+ Tatu +-
    • Michael Schøler
      ... I ve just read a nice article regarding RESTful web services I would like to share: RESTful Web Services vs. ``Big Web Services: Making the Right
      Message 2 of 6 , Apr 29, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In json@yahoogroups.com, "kriszyp" <kriszyp@...> wrote:
        > ...
        > If you are interested in storing JSON data in a database, you should
        > take a look at my project, Persevere
        > (http://code.google.com/p/persevere-framework/). It works with a
        > RESTful JSON interface.
        > ...

        I've just read a nice article regarding RESTful web services I would
        like to share:

        RESTful Web Services vs. ``Big'' Web Services: Making the Right
        Architectural Decision
        (http://www.www2008.org/papers/fp179.html)

        Best regards
        Michael Schøler
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.