Re: XML in PostgreSQL

* Joel Rodrigues <borgempath(at)Phreaker(dot)net> [2003-03-04 06:58]:

> Reading XML and Databases by Ronald Bourret : Storing Documents in BLOBs
> http://www.rpbourret.com/xml/XMLAndDatabases.htm#blob
>
> Persistence: SGML and XML in Databases
> http://www.isgmlug.org/database.html
>
> XML data management systems By Paul Sholtz
> http://www.newarchitectmag.com/archives/2002/10/

Hmm... I'd better get to Amazon, thanks.

> >On Thursday, February 27, 2003, at 07:19 , Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >
> >The main reason nothing is happening is that no one can really come up
> >with the grand master design plan for this. There's an SQL
> >standard under development which addresses various ways to
> >combine SQL and XML. Once that is finished we have something to
> >work with. Incidentally, that standard depends on XQuery getting
> >done first, so don't hold your breath.
>
> The seemingly ceaseless stream of 'Working Draft' and 'Candidate
> Recommendation' announcements from the W3C leaves me on the
> verge of a hissy fit. Not to mentioned very confused.
>
> Leaving aside what might come to be in the future, the reality
> is that ways & means of dealing with XML right now in PostgreSQL
> *are* needed and Gray's contrib/xml seems like a good start.
>
> I imagine that a workaround is possible in PostgreSQL using the
> idea mentioned in the articles cited above, of storing the XML
> document in it's entirety in one table and using another table
> as an 'index table'.

Why store the whole document in PostgreSQL? Why not leave it on the
file system where you can have at it with xsltproc or xalan?

Incidently, I am building a document management system in PostgreSQL
that manages XML documents. This subject is very interesting to me.

I've found that mapping XML data to an RDBMS is difficult and
kludgy. It was a real breakthough for me when I realized that not
every document had to be ER modeled.

--
Alan Gutierrez - ajglist(at)izzy(dot)net
http://khtml-win32.sourceforge.net/ - KHTML on Windows