Re: Separate PK in Jxn Tbl?
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 19:24:05 -0400
Message-ID: <479d129b$0$4054$9a566e8b_at_news.aliant.net>
>
>
> I don't believe the above is correct. It's still the case that a graph
> based DBMS
> like IMS can otperform an SQL based DBMS for queries that were anticipated
> at the time the graph was designed. This is not a function of the
> complexity of the query.
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 19:24:05 -0400
Message-ID: <479d129b$0$4054$9a566e8b_at_news.aliant.net>
David Cressey wrote:
> "Sylvain Lafontaine" <sylvain aei ca (fill the blanks, no spam please)>
> wrote in message news:OowKsDTYIHA.5416_at_TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
>>This remind me of the discussion twenty five years ago between relational >>databases (like SQL-Server) and non-relational databases (like ISAM >>databases, dBase, etc.). It has always been right to say that for simple >>queries, non-relational databases are faster than relational databases. >>However, nowadays, non-relational databases have (practically) vanished >>because of their inherent slowness when the queries become more and more >>complicated. >>
>
>
> I don't believe the above is correct. It's still the case that a graph
> based DBMS
> like IMS can otperform an SQL based DBMS for queries that were anticipated
> at the time the graph was designed. This is not a function of the
> complexity of the query.
I, of course, disagree. A graph based dbms has no performance advantage over a relational dbms because a relational dbms may use exactly the same physical structures.
[snip] Received on Mon Jan 28 2008 - 00:24:05 CET