[REBOL] Re: possible data format ... Re: Re: dbms3.r 01
From: rotenca:telvia:it at: 16-Jan-2002 0:47
> What I (my opinions only) conclude so far, though review of some of
> the existing implementations may change this -
> 1. Text files for persistent storage
> 2. REBOL Blocks for grouping values
> 3. Native REBOL representation for values
> 4. Use single base directory - no directory structure required
> 5. Use multiple (named) text files to map to tables, indexes and large text
> 6. Keep at least the table data file simple, readable, and self contained
> 7. One record per line
> 8. Use some manner of file append to manage record changes
> 9. Delete record operation is only a marker until packed
> 10. Need utilities to pack db and provide canonical form
> 11. Every row has an automatic internal "row-id"
> 12. Manipulate records as blocks of values
> 13. Result sets are built as blocks of blocks of values
> 14. The in-memory format should not be constrained by the persistent format
> The rest, and yes there were more good points only not quite as
> well defined, can wait for the next round of design theory. :-)
I substantially agree.
Now i feel myself in a relational maze. But from now, Gabriele has a week of
time to give us a complete bug-free program. Count down has started :-)
About all the rebol db programs, i wait a comparative review from you (another
Can't you say us the link to find the db which are not on rebol library?
> Thanks, Rod.