Re: foundations of relational theory?

You have a choice.

My personal favourite is D3 on Linux which you can get from ftp://ftp.rainingdata.com/pub/Linux/7.4.x There are versions of D3 for different host OSes also. RainingData is the new name of the company originally founded by Richard Pick (Pick Systems) btw.

NorthGate is another company who can trace their roots right back the the very early days of the Pick-like database model and you can download their offering from
http://portal.northgate-is.com/portal/content/read/Public/External/Reality/RealityEvaluationV100.html

One of the relative newcomers - and also one with an extremely loyal and enthusiatic growing number of users - is jBase. Download an evaluation version from
http://www.jbase.com/products/jbase_download.html

You could also choose to download one of IBM's MultiValue (Pick-like) offerings - UniVerse and UniData from
https://www-927.ibm.com/software/data/u2/support/u2techconnect/

Regards
Mike.

"Dan Guntermann" <guntermann_at_verizon.net> wrote in message news:<Yzakb.5440$Ee6.2964_at_nwrddc01.gnilink.net>...
> Thanks for the clarification Mike. And yes I did miss much of the thread.
>
> I'll probably catch up and then ask questions if you don't mind. I am
> curious to learn more, if not only to get the real facts and have the
> capability to compare and contrast. I agree that that is the only way to
> make a fair judgment.
>
> Thanks again,
>
> - Dan
>
> So is there an evaluation copy of a "pick" or "pick-like" database
> available. I didn't see anything available
> "Mike Preece" <michael_at_preece.net> wrote in message
> news:1b0b566c.0310180112.627a6fca_at_posting.google.com...
> > Hi Dan
> >
> > It's unfortunate that you seem to have missed the posts in this
> > thread, and almost every other thread concerning comparisons between
> > Pick and any other kind of database, in which people using Pick claim
> > time and again that application development and maintenance (or "any
> > little change" to the database) is actually faster, easier and less
> > disruptive than when using alternative database models. I don't expect
> > you or anyone else to blindly accept those claims. Neither do I blame
> > you or anyone else for an inability to form your own opinions based on
> > fact rather than hearsay. Because of the lack of published papers
> > accurately and formally defining exactly what Pick is and how it
> > works, it's an unfortunate fact that the best way to appraise it is to
> > try it. This is, I'm sure you'll readily agree, a deplorable state of
> > affairs. As an alternative, feel free to ask questions rather than
> > draw hasty conclusions or assume it's flawed because it seems to be
> > something similar to something else.
> >
> > Regards
> > Mike.
> >
> >
> > "Dan Guntermann" <guntermann_at_verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:<zh5kb.11449$mp1.10498_at_nwrddc02.gnilink.net>...
> > > Look. You make the same arguments as those proponents of network/IMS
> > > databases.
> > >
> > > It's great for the programmer who has to rewrite both the database and
> the
> > > application program for any little change...it keeps him or her
> employed,
> > > and if the programmer is really good, and the enterprise doesn't desire
> a
> > > general purpose, integrated database system, but rather embedded
> stand-alone
> > > applications all over the place, then it seems that Pick does have a
> place
> > > in the world, just like IMS and other systems that place one-time, rigid
> > > structure and performance requirements over flexibility and scalability
> (not
> > > necessarily a bad thing...to each its own).
> > >
> > > That's all there is to it. Nothing new. You have an in-memory
> hierarchical
> > > inline buffer for your application which makes it blindingly fast.
> > > Congratulations.
> > >
> > > I would just say that today's trends tend to even more integration and
> > > interoperability in both the application and data domain, which seems to
> run
> > > counter to Pick's strengths.
> > >
> > > - Dan
Received on Sun Oct 19 2003 - 06:57:11 CEST