Re: The Practical Benefits of the Relational Model

From: mountain man <prfbrown_at_magna.com.au>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 15:39:41 +1000
Message-ID: <xHwk9.40091$g9.116097_at_newsfeeds.bigpond.com>


"Nathan Allan" <nathan_at_alphora.com> wrote in message news:fedf3d42.0209231414.46044051_at_posting.google.com...
> "mountain man" <prfbrown_at_magna.com.au> wrote in message
news:<_4Oi9.36757$g9.105141_at_newsfeeds.bigpond.com>...
>
> > My term "evolution" simply recognises that there are a multitude
> > of forces at play, beyond any one corporation or individual.
>
> Fair enough. :-)
>
> > > Your suggestions revolves around the assumption that today's DBMSs are
> > > a capable environment for application development.
> >
> > I have demonstrated with R&D on MS SQLServer over the last 2 years
> > that at least this RDBMS provides such a capable environment.
>
> Hmmm... I am familiar with SQL Server and would have to strongly
> disagree. Imperative programming for SQL Server is done in "Transact
> SQL" which is probably one of the worst languages I have ever
> encountered. There is a running joke in our office that the only
> thing consistent in TSQL is it's inconsistency. TSQL aside, SQL
> Server definitely is not capable of enforcing more than basic
> integrity constraints (real time, and even WITH triggers).

Nathan, the result of what one person achieves with a shovel is not necessarily the same as that of another worker who also uses the same shovel.

When all is said and done, these machines and DBs are tools in the hands of the trades-people. I and the folk in my office find TSQL sufficient, but then again we have been using it professionally for quite some time.

Best wishes,

--
Farmer Brown
Falls Creek, Australia
http://www.mountainman.com.au/software
Received on Thu Sep 26 2002 - 07:39:41 CEST

Original text of this message