Re: A better SQL implementation?

From: Cimode <>
Date: 7 Jun 2006 07:21:44 -0700
Message-ID: <>

Roy Hann wrote:

> Great. I look forward to a treatise on "How to Apply Cosmetics to a Pig"
> too.
SQL implementation <> SQL as a language

Well, the point of this guy is that existing implementations of SQL are sub optimal which is not such a ridiculous point. His assumption that SQL implementation can be improved only through bringing back SQL implementation closer to RM .

> > As an indicative annotation, he was a part of the developping team that
> > worked on System-R.
> So he would probably know that even at the time there was considerable
> agitation among the theorists about using SQL for an allegedly relational
> database system? Yet his view would appear still to be that it was just
> the engine that wasn't quite right.
I think both debates (Debate1: is SQL ok for RM implementation and Debate2: how do we implement SQL are not the same). He was involved in Debate 2

> Roy

I have had a chance to test his system and I can tell you it shows promising results as his implementation of SQL is closer to RM spirit onto how to perform operations. It is far from being perfect though. The Atlas engine is integrated into a set of integrated applications helping to manage various forms of content. A trial version can be downloaded and tested. It does not handle concurrency because it's mono version but response time is impressive on db's > 100 Gb with complex evaluation conditions. (at least that's what I tested) Received on Wed Jun 07 2006 - 16:21:44 CEST

Original text of this message