Re: CODASYL-like databases

From: Ken North <>
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 20:41:25 GMT
Message-ID: <VhbJj.20$>

Book titles carried by a Barnes & Noble are not an indication of what mature technology is in use. They are a better indication of what technology has captured reader's interest - often because it's new and book buyers are learning. COBOL and IMS have been around for four decades so it would be hard to find a publisher who wants to publish a title about either. The market is too small.

But COBOL and IMS are far from dead. It was only about 5 years ago that the number of Java programmers exceeded the number of COBOL programmers. In 2005, IBM reported IMS was handling over 15 million gigabytes of data and 50 billion transactions per day:

  • Ken North ===========

"Tegiri Nenashi" <> wrote in message On Apr 1, 10:47 am, DBMS_Plumber <> wrote:
> On Apr 1, 6:20 am, -CELKO- <> wrote:
> > Most oft he business data in the world is still in IMS today.
> If you define "business data" extremely narrowly - essentially to just
> buy/sell/ship/receive stuff - then it's remotely possible that IMS
> still dominates (though I doubt it). But if you include all the
> personnel records management, sales management, and what-not, no way.

The other way to estimate the significance (or rather perceived significance) of technology is to calculate the number of book titles, perhaps weighted by their popularity. For that matter I can't remeber seen any IMS book in the local barnes-n-noble. Granted there is a boring factor (for example, there aren't that many SAP or peoplesoft titles either), still the adjective "dominates" can hardly apply to IMS judged by any criteria. Received on Thu Apr 03 2008 - 22:41:25 CEST

Original text of this message