CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2009/wiki3 12 obj to relational: Difference between revisions

From Expertiza_Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 5: Line 5:


[[Image:Fp1059-shape-ball.JPG |thumb]] [10]
[[Image:Fp1059-shape-ball.JPG |thumb]] [10]
Object-orientation and relational model are different paradigms of programming.[1] The object paradigm is based on building applications out of objects that have both data and behavior,
Object-orientation and relational model are different paradigms of programming.[1] The object paradigm is based on building applications out of objects that have both data and behavior, whereas the relational paradigm is based on storing data. With the object paradigm, one traverses objects via their relationships whereas with the relational paradigm one duplicates data to join the rows in tables.[2] The difference between how object models work and relational databases is known as the “Object-Relational Impedance Mismatch”. This is just nerd-speak for “they are different”. In analogy, we could consider the example of the ball and shape game. It's the same thing; you can’t fit a square in a triangle hole.[10]
whereas the relational paradigm is based on storing data. With the object paradigm, one traverses objects via their relationships whereas with the relational paradigm one duplicates data to join the rows in tables.[2] The difference between how object models work and relational databases is known as the “Object-Relational Impedance Mismatch”. This is just nerd-speak for “they are different”. In analogy, we could consider the example of the ball and shape game. It's the same thing; you can’t fit a square in a triangle hole.[10]


One way to avoid the impedance mismatch between objects and relations is to use an object-oriented
One way to avoid the impedance mismatch between objects and relations is to use an object-oriented
database. However, systems often need to store objects in a relational database. Sometimes a system needs
database. However, systems often need to store objects in a relational database. Sometimes a system needs
relational calculus or the maturity of a relational database. Other times the corporate policy is to use a relational database rather than an object-oriented database. Whatever the reason, a system that stores
relational calculus or the maturity of a relational database. Other times the corporate policy is to use a relational database rather than an object-oriented database. Whatever the reason, a system that stores
objects in a relational database needs to provide a design that reduces the impedance mismatch.
objects in a relational database needs to provide a design that reduces the impedance mismatch.[5] One of the secrets of success for mapping objects to relational databases is to understand both paradigms, and their differences, and then make intelligent trade offs based on that knowledge.[2] An application that maps between the two paradigms needs to be designed with respect to performance, maintainability and cost to name just a few requirements.[4]
 
This paper describes only a part of a pattern language for mapping objects to relations, but it describes the
patterns that we thought were not adequately described elsewhere.[5]
 
 
 
 
The Object-Relational Mismatch
 
One of the secrets of success for mapping
objects to relational databases is to understand both paradigms, and their differences, and then make
intelligent tradeoffs based on that knowledge.[2]
 
 
Unfortunately we need to deal with the object relational (O/R) impedance mismatch, and to do so you need to understand two things: the
process of mapping objects to relational databases and how to implement those mappings.[3]
 
Designing software to connect an object-oriented business system with a relational database is
a tedious task. Object-orientation and the relational paradigm differ quite a bit. An application
that maps between the two paradigms needs to be designed with respect to performance,
maintainability and cost to name just a few requirements. Luckily there are numerous patterns
of object/relational access layers, but looking at the body of pattern literature you will find that
some patterns are still to be mined, while there's no generative "one stop" pattern language for
the problem domain. This paper provides a systematic roadmap of the patterns in the field,
and fills some pot holes on the road towards a full pattern language for object/relational access
layers by providing some missing patterns and links.[4]
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 





Revision as of 00:00, 18 November 2009

Patterns for mapping objects to relational databases

The Object-Relational Mismatch

[10]

Object-orientation and relational model are different paradigms of programming.[1] The object paradigm is based on building applications out of objects that have both data and behavior, whereas the relational paradigm is based on storing data. With the object paradigm, one traverses objects via their relationships whereas with the relational paradigm one duplicates data to join the rows in tables.[2] The difference between how object models work and relational databases is known as the “Object-Relational Impedance Mismatch”. This is just nerd-speak for “they are different”. In analogy, we could consider the example of the ball and shape game. It's the same thing; you can’t fit a square in a triangle hole.[10]

One way to avoid the impedance mismatch between objects and relations is to use an object-oriented database. However, systems often need to store objects in a relational database. Sometimes a system needs relational calculus or the maturity of a relational database. Other times the corporate policy is to use a relational database rather than an object-oriented database. Whatever the reason, a system that stores objects in a relational database needs to provide a design that reduces the impedance mismatch.[5] One of the secrets of success for mapping objects to relational databases is to understand both paradigms, and their differences, and then make intelligent trade offs based on that knowledge.[2] An application that maps between the two paradigms needs to be designed with respect to performance, maintainability and cost to name just a few requirements.[4]


Object-relational mapping.

Concurrency Patterns

Read/Write Access Pattern

Conclusion

The concurrency patterns discussed above involve coordinating concurrent operations. They address two types of problems:[5]

Shared resources - When concurrent operations access the same data or another type of shared resource, operations may interfere with each other if they access the resource at the same time. To ensure that operations on shared resources execute correctly, the operations must be sufficiently constrained to access their shared resource one at a time. However, if the operations are overly constrained, then they may deadlock and not be able to finish executing.

Sequence of operations - If operations are constrained to access a shared resource one at a time, it may be necessary to ensure that they access the shared resource in a particular order. For example, an object cannot be removed from a data structure before it is added to the data structure.

See Also

References

[1] Wolfgang Keller, Mapping Objects to Tables - A Pattern Language http://www.objectarchitects.de/ObjectArchitects/papers/Published/ZippedPapers/mappings04.pdf

[2] Scott W. Ambler, President, Ronin International, Mapping Objects To Relational Databases http://www.crionics.com/products/opensource/faq/docs/mappingObjects.pdf

[3] Scott W. Ambler, Mapping Objects to Relational Databases: O/R Mapping In Detail http://www.agiledata.org/essays/mappingObjects.html

[4] Wolfgang Keller, Object/Relational Access Layers - A Roadmap, Missing Links and More Patterns http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/4328.html

[5] Joseph W. Yoder, Ralph E. Johnson, Quince D. Wilson, Connecting Business Objects to Relational Databases http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.34.7703&rep=rep1&type=pdf

[6] Michael R. Blaha, William J. Premerlani and James E. Rumbaugh, Relational Database Design using an Object-Oriented Methodology http://www.sims.monash.edu.au/subjects/ims2501/seminars/oomodelling.pdf

[7] http://www.cetus-links.org/oo_db_systems_3.html

[8] http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/ws-mapping-to-rdb/

[9] http://www.objectarchitects.de/ObjectArchitects/orpatterns/index.htm?MappingObjects2Tables/mapping_object.htm

[10] http://cantgrokwontgrok.blogspot.com/2009/03/tech-day-1-nhibernate.html

[11] http://www.adobe.com/newsletters/edge/october2008/articles/article2/index.html?trackingid=DWZST