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.