Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!husc6!necntc!culdev1!yg From: yg@culdev1.UUCP Newsgroups: comp.databases Subject: Re: Smalltalk VM viewed as a DBMS Message-ID: <1787@culdev1.UUCP> Date: Wed, 25-Nov-87 14:27:51 EST Article-I.D.: culdev1.1787 Posted: Wed Nov 25 14:27:51 1987 Date-Received: Sun, 29-Nov-87 01:46:17 EST References: <121@citcom.UUCP> Organization: Cullinet Software, Westwood, MA, USA Lines: 16 Summary: The main advantage of DBMS's - data sharing! In article <121@citcom.UUCP>, jack@citcom.UUCP (Jack Waugh) writes: > > Thus, as far as I can see, the type of "virtual memory" system > Smalltalk uses meets the definition of a DBMS. > The main difference between the Smalltalk systems and the traditional DBMS is the the lack of data sharing, concurrency control, and transaction management. (Yes, one could write a system in Smalltalk that do the above mentioned things). > Are there applications that traditionally use a traditional DBMS > that could as well or better use OOZE, LOOM, or another mechanism > designed originally to meet Smalltalk's needs? Do not know about OOZE or LOOM, so can't say.