Re: Oracle versus MS Sqlserver 2000: Technical Comparison of the Features in the two databases

Following up on Howard J. Rogers, 11 Mar 2003:

>
> Don't panic, Nuno. By then, the database will advise them of where the
> nearest therapist is, and they can calm down, safe in the knowledge that
> the database is coping with situation.

Panic moah? About what, the "pending death" of the DBA? Yeah, right: like, it's something new?

>
> "Then" is next year, BTW.

Oh no it isn't! :)
Of course, Larry will *announce* it
as such. But we all know that's not the case. It will take YEARS before that version has ANY impact on the market. Or else Larry has found out how to give away a database and still collect $$$ for it...
And he's got a few minor problems to handle before that is fully implemented, anyways. Like: a worldwide recession, for starters.

>
> There will always be a market for the uber-guru. Like there has always
> been a market for the lumpenproletariat. Tis the way of things.
> Polarisation, and nary a twiglet between the extremes.

Narh! You're simplifying things...
Where is the complexity? Haven't you learned anything yet from the Java/J2EE craze? No new IT technology has EVER simplified anything. Ever!
<G>

>
> Either you're an Alpha, or a Gamma, or you know XML.
> Welcome to the brave new world.

I've been IN it for many, many moons... ;)

>
> Sorry. Can't hang around. Got my 'XML in 20 Minutes" book to finish.

Brush up on BNF (if you can find ANY stuff on it, that is!) and SGML while you're at it. XML is just a very small subset of those two.

And MACRO is still the best way of handling it all, but I won't tell you where to find it or what it is! Once again, good old Sperry was DECADES ahead of everyone else... :)

XML is useless by itself for the purpose it is being "sold", as you probably have found by now. Without a framework to understand the schema you can "xml" until the cows come home, no one is gonna collect the milk. Let's just call "understanding the schema" the brains of the operation. Design is going to be SOOOO important from now on...

BTW, the whole XML thing is moronically simple. But that will spring out in time. There are a few good books around. There is also a LOT of utter rubbish. Be very careful. Do not let anyone confuse you with .NET: that is NOT XML, no matter what Billy says. It IS the framework, though. I'm not saying it isn't important. Actually, M$ is streets ahead of Oracle on that. The framework, I mean. Bad move, Lazza... :)

A bit of history: (heck, you're into contemporary stuff, aren't you? <G>)

In 1982, 430 Control Data Cobol programs from RTA were converted to Sperry ANSII Cobol using a MACRO program, a BNF schema (an XML schema in today's language) and about 35 minutes of CPU time in an 1100/62 mainframe. About a million lines of code, give or take a few thousand. Zero human intervention to conver the programs. We charged a few months of "consultancy", of course!

In the process, we also converted most of their data files in less than a week. Using very much the same technology. Yours truly wrote the macro stuff and the schema and file converter macros. That was in the days I was doing compiler and PIOCS (Physical Input and Output Control Software) support and debugging for Sperry. Darn, that WAS fun!

Full circle again! Oh well, the more things change... :D

-- 
Cheers
Nuno Souto
wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au.nospam