Re: Java to die in 2003

"Niall Litchfield" <niall.litchfield_at_dial.pipex.com> wrote in message news:<3e136592$0$227$cc9e4d1f_at_news.dial.pipex.com>...
> "Joel Garry" <joel-garry_at_home.com> wrote in message
> news:91884734.0212311517.78cdcf90_at_posting.google.com...
> <snip a lot of interesting argument>
> > Is it really a good idea
> > to re-write stored procedures every time you change a database vendor?
> What do you do to support multiple databases?
>
> Actually I think that it is. Of course my experience is coloured by buying
> third party products that run on a varety of different database platforms.
> They invariably are demonstrably sub-optimal as far as the database platform
> that they are running on (Oracle) is concerned. I'd much rather that if you
> are buying a product that costs as much as RDBMS's cost then products that
> ran on that product were able to take advantage of the features you just
> paid all that cash for.

Totally agree. I've become schizo about this. Since the way SP's work rules out SP's being the same between db's, that becomes very labor intensive, either two code trees or some horrible trade-offs. The 3rd-party problems become more severe as the complexity of the products increase and the features between db's diverge. Gateway products - I won't even get into that.

Then there's scalability. Oracle doesn't scale down well, either in the complexity of using products such as forms, or in the db itself (although it is definitely getting better there).

But in the end, it's the apps. Some crappola that can do the job will often win over vaporware. And that's good, right?

>
> > What if you want to
> > join data between databases?
>
> In general I wouldn't. I'd want to either ship data between databases or
> publish an interface to the data, and call it from some business logic
> somewhere outside the db.

Well, it sounds like you are just hiding the join in the business logic. How slow is that?

>
> >
> > Isn't PL/SQL an oxymoron, given that SQL is non-procedural?
>
> <G>, Transact-SQL is kind of an interesting name as well thought about in
> this sort of way.

:-)

>
> Cheers
>
>
> --
> Niall Litchfield
> Oracle DBA
> Audit Commission UK
> *****************************************
> Please include version and platform
> and SQL where applicable
> It makes life easier and increases the
> likelihood of a good answer
> ******************************************

jg

--
@home is bogus
Stuck in the middle of an inventory update... sigh...