Re: Database in Redhat Linux

In comp.os.linux.misc Anthony W. Youngman <thewolery_at_nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
:>: And it's a real pity that there are so many people who think that the
:>: only valid type of database is a SQL database.
:>
:>Sincerely, I never seen any other kind of database which is usable
:>without writing special program for any query. SQL is only practical
:>solution've seen, which allows you to type queries in interactively.
:>There is also QBE, but it doesn't count, becouse it is
:>a) relational
:>b) if fully implementted is functionally equivalent to SQL.
:>

: Ask an END USER to run a query over four entities. Oh, by the way, : there's a many-to-many relationship in there somewhere...

Using QBE? Just easy - draw a line by mouse here, there and elsewhere and you've four entities linked together.

Using SQL? a bit more difficult. You have to tell stupid machine that value of TYPE_ID is this table should be equal to TYPE_ID in that table, but tell on almost plain English.

:>Restriction which mySQL places on the programmers are worst of all - they
:>causes them to PROGRAM, instead of to DESIGN.
:>

: I don't know mySQL that well, but you need some programming for
: anything. If you mean triggers, data integrity etc, I gather mySQL was
: designed for fast extraction, and it sounds like you're using the wrong
: tool for the job...

I don't use it, and probably never would. Becouse I cannot imagine a problem which wouldn't benefit from good decomposition. If it is tabular by nature, it would need something more relational than mySQL.

If not, it is better to use something ENTIRELY different.

Even if it is not possible to decompose tables, program might benefit from distributing data between different schemas with different access rights and grant appropriate permission. Oracle allows to access different schemas from same connection, mySQL doesn't.

And if you have about 50 simulateously connected copies of Apache (not mention interactive applications) mySQL begins to crawl.

:>SQL + storage manager behind them. Nothing more. Even OS is not always
:>neccessary.
:>May be FORTRAN
:>preprocessor. Clients should be written on normal using
:>jdbc, odbc, dbi or some other kind of standartized interface.
:>
:>Of course good interactive shell is good, but I always have dbish.
:>

: A good interactive shell makes life easy...

Of course. And in this field psql is much better than sqlplus. May be I should find time to write "GNU Oracle Shell" - something which is distributed OpenSource and uses GNU readline, but works with Oracle database.

:>:>So, only free database is PostgreSQL. But PostgreSQL start to
:>:>
:>: I think you mean the only free *relational* database - which is not the
:>: same thing at all. There are much better databases out there. While I
:>
:>Please name _free_ non-relational database which is comparable with
:>commercial ones. As far as I know, most free non-relational things are
:>compared with say Adabas, like mySQL to Oracle or worse.
 

: I don't know of any _free_ ones that are currently usable. I'm working : on MaVerick...

So, we are back to my point - PostgreSQL is only free database. It is relational (what's pity), but no non-relational one exists.

:>Guys who wrote mySQL think same way. Unfortunately, they was wrong.
:>Becouse there is nothing more practical then good theory.
:>
:>Theoretical purity gives flexibility, scalability and tunability.
:>This is why people don't write on CODASIL anymore.
:>

: Rules are for the guidance of wise men, and the obedience of fools. The
: real world is not amenable to forcing into a relational mould. For some
: things it works fine, but trying to force non-relational data into a
: relational straitjacket can (will?) make life difficult later on. Why

Of course. But it only means that somebody picks wrong theory. And if you want something better, you'll have to find branch of mathematics which describe your problem better than relational algebra.

Probably, I've found one for my problem. Now some people from MSU work by the contract with our firm on the graph-based database.

: are people now throwing so much effort at object databases? Try running
: a data warehouse on a relational db - a big warehouse will bring a Cray
: to its knees...

It seems that objects is an universal solution for problems where no special theory exists. That is why all OO languages are so bloated.

-- 
Randal can write one-liners again.  Everyone is happy, and peace spreads
over the whole Earth.
             -- Larry Wall in <199705101952.MAA00756_at_wall.org>