In review
Object-oriented databases (OODBs) evolved from a need to support
object-oriented programming and to reap the benefits, such as system
maintainability, from applying object orientation to
developing complex software systems. The first OODBs appeared in the late
1980s. Martin provides a complete list of these early OODBs
[Martin 93]. OODBs
are based on the
object model and use the same conceptual models as Object-Oriented Analysis, Object-Oriented Design and Object-Oriented Programming
Languages. Using the same conceptual model simplifies development;
improves communication among users, analysts, and programmers; and lessens the
likelihood of errors
[Martin 93].
OODBs are designed for the purpose of storing and sharing objects; they are a
solution for
persistent object handling.
Persistent data are data that remain after a process is terminated.
There is no universally-acknowledged standard for OODBs. There is, however, some commonality in the architecture of the different OODBs because of three necessary components: object managers, object servers, and object stores. Applications interact with object managers, which work through object servers to gain access to object stores.
OODBs provide the following benefits:
- OODBs allow for the storage of complex data structures that can not be easily stored using conventional database technology.
- OODBs support all the persistence necessary when working with object-oriented languages.
- OODBs contain active object servers that support not only the distribution
of data but also the distribution of work (in this context, relational
database management systems (DBMS) have limited capabilities)
[Vorwerk 94].
In addition, OODBs were designed to be well integrated with object-oriented
programming languages such as C++ and Smalltalk. They use the same object
model as these languages. With OODBs, the programmer deals with transient
(temporary) and persistent (permanent) objects in a uniform manner. The
persistent objects are in the OODB, and thus the conceptual walls between
programming and database are removed. As stated earlier, the employment of a
unified conceptual model greatly simplifies development
[
|
[Desanti 94]
|
Desanti, Mike & Gomsi, Jeff. "A Comparison of Object and Relational Database Technologies." Object Magazine 3, 5 (January 1994): 51-57.
|
|
[Martin 93]
|
Martin, James. Principles of Object-Oriented Analysis and
Design. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1993.
|
|
[Object 96]
|
"Focus on ODBMS Debunking the Myths." Object Magazine 5, 9 (February 1996): 21-23.
|
|
[Tkach 94]
|
Tkach, Daniel & Puttick, Richard. Object Technology in Application
Development. Redwood City, CA: Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company, 1994.
|
|
[Vorwerk 94]
|
Vorwerk, Raymond. "Towards a True OBBMS." Object Magazine 3, 5 (January 1994): 38-39.
|