Re: Nearest Common Ancestor Report (XDb1's $1000 Challenge)

On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 21:21:13 GMT, Jeff Brooks <jeff_brooks_at_nospam.com> wrote:

>Neo wrote:
>>>You still owe me $1000.
>>
>> Because RM solutions (1 and 2) thus far aren't as normalized or
>> generic as XDb1's, they fail under a broader scope of data.
>
>I decided to do a quick look at the xdb1 website. I found the following
>limitations posted on the site:
>
>LIMITATIONS
>-----------
>Single-User - It is not a multi-user database.

Well, okay, some applications only need a single user solution. Not many *real* applications, but I'm sure there must be some.

>RAM Intensive - It loads the entire database into main memory. The
>maximum database size is appoximately 4 GB with appropriate hardware.
>The maximum size will increase on 64-bit processors (ie Intel's Itanium).

Run that by me again? The whole database in RAM? Erm ... hang on a minute, wasn't Keanu complaining that SQL server was caching it's queries in RAM, thus "cheating" when Hugo so convincingly outpaced keanu's so-called databse "XDB1" using SQL Server? Umm ...

>SQL - None. Data is managed via XDb's GUI, NLI and API. Things can be
>located via relational expressions.

Translation: "I can write a b-tree implementation, but an SQL parser is beyond me."

>Security - None currently.

Could this be the next Micros~1 database?

>Transactions - None.

It's definitely looking like Micros~1 material ...

>Recovery - None. Regular backups, UPS, stable OS, and reliable PC
>recommended.

Yep, Micros~1 will be making you an offer any day now, Keanu.

>Lol, xdb1 is a pathetic toy. No one in their right mind would rely on it
>for data storage.
>
>Jeff Brooks
>
>p.s. Neo your a fraud, and you owe Hugo $1000.

A fraud and a liar, with a half-baked product that makes even MS Access look good.

Pay the man, Keanu.

Lemming

-- 
Curiosity *may* have killed Schrodinger's cat.