couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Antony Blakey <>
Subject Re: Erlang vs Scala
Date Thu, 09 Apr 2009 02:07:18 GMT
Architecting a solution to use both XML and JSON (or any other type)  
is easy if you a) store canonical data in uninterpreted binary form  
and b) allow plugable data-type dependent indexing.

I think CouchDB has shown the way to a more generalized solution in  
this space.

On 09/04/2009, at 11:31 AM, Daniel Friesen wrote:

> CouchDB as an XML database? Bah...
> If you're going xml why use Couch? XML already has XQuery  
> standardized and there are a number of XML database implementations  
> already in existence.
> At work I'm using Sedna since we just couldn't handle our  
> hierarchical structure inside of CouchDB.
> ~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire)
> Wout Mertens wrote:
>> On Apr 8, 2009, at 10:07 AM, Brian Candler wrote:
>>>> So I began to wonder if it wouldn't be better for CouchDB to be
>>>> written in Scala.
>>> Next you will be saying that it would be better for CouchDB to use  
>>> XML
>>> instead of JSON :-)
>> Oh wow that'd be awesome! ;-)
>> Wout.

Antony Blakey
CTO, Linkuistics Pty Ltd
Ph: 0438 840 787

When I hear somebody sigh, 'Life is hard,' I am always tempted to ask,  
'Compared to what?'
   -- Sydney Harris

View raw message