PJ6 wrote:
> "Paul" <paul_at_see.my.sig.com> wrote in message
> news:ph73j1564ce8f8ncteovbihggrlivtf3n5_at_4ax.com...
> > For that amount of data and users, you should look at some of the open
> > source offerings, which are well able to cope with this type of data.
> > What is your development environment?
>
> Windows XP.
>
> > An extremely powerful procedural language - PL/SQL, runs on *nix,
> > partitioning (for large amounts of data), + lots more.
>
> I was taught that the procedural paradigm does not belong in a relational
> system. I'm all for integrating something OO into the DB engine directly to
> allow stuff like custom aggregate functions and automatic materialized path
> generation from a parent/child table (SQL 2005's .NET integration looks
> promising), but I'm a little leary of introducing loops and other procedural
> badness directly into my queries.
>
> Paul
That is not what PL/SQL is for.
Received on Wed Sep 21 2005 - 17:01:45 CDT
