Re: Powerbuilder & Oracle
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 1994 15:14:24 GMT
Message-ID: <D0JuC1.A6y_at_lanier.com>
In article <3c8kbs$n3f_at_aggedor.rmit.edu.au>,
David Bath <dtb_at_hera.bf.rmit.edu.au> wrote:
>garon_at_indirect.com (Microright Corp) writes:
>
>>David Shay (shayD_at_moravian.edu) wrote:
>>: Any comments from anyone currently running Powerbuilder & Oracle would be
>>: greatly appreciated, either by mail or to this group.
>>I've use Powerbuild & Oracle alot. All I can say is it works great. I
>>like Powerbuilder a lot more than Forms for several reasons (faster,
>>extensible, more reliable, fewer bugs, etc.). I just hope that
>>PowerSoft and Sybase mean it when they said "independant subsidiary"
>
>Yeah, but I've seen the databases it creates under Oracle. Yukko
>physical storage parameters like tablespaces, extents etc.
>
This is one of the problems I see with current tools. People have been
talking for twenty years about "separating logical design from physical
design", but no tool that I know of does it. Oracle has the "create schema"
command that allows you to create a group of related tables, procedures, etc
as a unit, but if you use it, you are forced into the default storage
parameters. Why not a "create storage" command to define the physical storage
for an object separate from the logical definition? Let a "create <object>"
command just enter the object into the dictionary, and use the "create storage
for <object>" to define the physical storage. This would allow developers
and DBAs to work more independently. Does anyone know of a tool that does
something like this?
Donald E. Vick (dvick_at_lanier.com, dvick_at_crl.com) Voice: (404) 493-2194 Fax: (404) 493-2399 Received on Fri Dec 09 1994 - 16:14:24 CET