
MagLev 1.0 Released - DanielRibeiro
http://www.infoq.com/news/2011/11/ruby-maglev-10
======
spooneybarger
I've used Gemstone/S with Smalltalk in a production environment and loved what
it did for us in terms of productivity. Not having to worry about persistence
is awesome. All you have to worry about is getting your data out into other
formats if you need to. That for me is a much easier problem to solve than
mapping OO concepts to a Relational persistence model.

The GLASS environment we were using is close Maglev. Its just swapping
Smalltalk for Ruby. For the vast majority of sites that would consider using
Maglev, scaling shouldn't be an issue and the Gemstone OODB at that level is
very easy to administer and maintain once you learn a few basic concepts.

If you want to get a strong understanding of how the OODB works, I strongly
suggest you check out James Foster's lengthy 2 part presentation from
Smalltalks 2009.

[http://gemstonesoup.wordpress.com/2009/12/02/james-
fosters-i...](http://gemstonesoup.wordpress.com/2009/12/02/james-fosters-
introduction-to-gemstone-videos/)

If anyone has any questions about working with the Gemstone OODB, I'd be happy
to have a conversation with you, my email address is in the contact info for
my account.

------
sant0sk1
MagLev _appears_ to be the holy grail for Ruby object persistence. Automatic
transactional persistence that is shared across VMs sounds pretty amazing to
me.

Yet the dev community seems to be only marginally interested in the project.
Why is this? Because it's not 100% free? Because it's too good to be true?
Because it's not 1.9?

~~~
spooneybarger
I've used Gemstone's OODB. It really isn't too good to be true. I'd look to
'not 100% free', not '1.9', no easy migration path to other data storage
platforms ( switching off gemstone wouldnt be like switching from MySQL to
PgSQL ) and various other concerns of that sort.

I'm am quite interested to hear from people who use Ruby but aren't interested
in Maglev as to why they aren't interested.

~~~
petercooper
No 1.9. Believe it or not, a large number of people have moved across. I've
been on it 'full time' for almost 2 years.

Other than that, though, it adds a lot of new stuff to learn. I'm sure it'll
be _worth_ learning but for better or worse, it's easier to let other people
play with the "1.0" and learn the lessons so that you can then rely more upon
the "1.1" or whatever.

~~~
halostatue
This. I maintain a few gems and I'm trying to get my testing up to speed and
make everything 1.9 compatible sooner rather than later. I'm not yet at the
point where I'm going to cut off users of 1.8.7, but by time 2.0 comes out
(February 2013), I will not be officially supporting 1.8.7 on any interpreter.

