On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 7:44 PM, Curtis Maloney <[email protected]> wrote: > But trying to shoe-horn a single API onto all models won't work.
+1 to this. there are lots of kinds of databases, relational, hierarchical, object based, key-value, document-based, column-oriented, graphs, spatial... the "common subset" is almost an empty set unless you do it for each category. still, some of these are on a category of its own, reducing the point of an abstraction layer. (Redis anyone?) > However, if you'd rather build an Object Document Mapper [ODM] to provide a > consistent API for document databases, that could have some value. An ODM with adaptors for MongoDB, CouchDB, maybe Cassandra (and even PostgreSQL, which does a far-better-than-average work on this space) could certainly be welcomed. > <rant> > I wish people would stop abusing the term "NoSQL". Your target concept is > Non-Relational data stores, not SQL itself. There's a whole bunch of > relational stores that don't use SQL, one of them is even called NoSQL!) > </rant> to me, "Non-Relational data stores" still sounds as precise as "non-elephant animals". barely better than NoSQL. I prefer to call each category by name. in this case, "document-based storage". -- Javier -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
