Re: Unknown SQL

Joe Cosby wrote:
> >Yes that is true, but wouldn't it be nice if there would be a standard
 that
> >defines how to do these tasks? Shouldn't it be part of something? SQL or
 a
> >standard API?
>
> Or maybe just less infighting between vendors or something.
 

:-)

Now how would you achieve that?
It's just like proposing "Let's end all wars on this planet".

> Really overall I think a lot of ill for developers and end users alike
> comes about with vendors trying to produce the Cool End Of The
> World Feature to end all Cool End Of The World Feautures and
> breeding incompatibility and inconsistency.

I don't think that this is ill. It's just natural evolution. There is no "one-size-fits-all". New "Cool End Of The World Features" might really be Cool End Of The World Features for certain applications.

A lot of ill currently comes from the stock markets: The size of companies is more important for the value of the stock than the quality of the products. Project managers only buy products from large companies. Maybe they will need to reconsider this point soon. A small healthy company with a low burn rate and love for their product is likely to be around longer than a large company without a concept.

> >In contrast to SQL our S.O.D.A. query interface has a "viewport".
> >"WHERE attribute.member = 'X' OR attribute = null" will always
 automatically
> >be an "outer join".
>
> ... well the interface sounds nice overall, but seriously, are you
> sure you want an outer join to be the default?

The "viewport" makes the difference. Using a hierarchical tree structure as the template for the query solves and explains "left-, right-, inner-, outer-" joins. You wouldn't have to call the above construct an "outer join". The query only makes sense if it is evaluated similar to an "outer join" in an SQL query.

> Overall though I don't mean to sound like I'm criticizing your
> product. I just think that the unclear distinction between theory and
> implementation can lead to a misunderstanding about what is 'needed'
> in a better product.

Please do criticize where appropriate.

> I might look at your system for some online projects, especially where
> out-of-the-box java protocols could give me some advantage.
>
> Maybe a visual interface for constructing servlet communications would
> be a good feature.
>
> There isn't a free low-end version, is there?

It's completely free for non-commercial use.

Kind regards,
Carl

---
Carl Rosenberger
db4o - database for objects - http://www.db4o.com