Re: Foreign key in Oracle Sql

On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 16:00:26 -0800, DA Morgan wrote:

>Hugo Kornelis wrote:
>
>> These are much harder to find on the 'net. Most sites with old numbers are
>> either actualized with newer numbers, or no longer up, or they are listed
>> only on Google's page 12,345 or so. I did manage to find a few tidbits:
>>
>> * http://www.muq.org/~cynbe/rants/lastdino.htm
>> This page, written jan 1999, claims Linux has reached 2.5% of the desktop
>> market. If that were correct, Linux would have lost market share over the
>> last five years. But I don't take this site too serious - the writer also
>> claims that the most likely growth extrapolation is a doubling of the
>> market share each six months, which would put Linux at 100% somewhere in
>> 2002 (unfortunately, the author fails to explain what another doubling of
>> market share, from 100% to 200% would indicate - each 'puter running TWO
>> copies of Linux???)
>
>The word "rants" in the URL pretty much eliminates it from consideration
>as a serious site.

Hi DA,

Indeed. And so ddoes the content of this page. I mainly included this as an illustration of how over-hyped Linux was back then. It is less so now, but it is still hard to find trustworthy figures - the Linux fans still have the tendency to exaggerate.

>> * http://news.com.com/2100-1001-236732.html?legacy=cnet
>> This page has a more serious appearance. It lists Linux market share for
>> server OS at 16% in 1998 and 25% in 1999. I'm not sure how to relate these
>> numbers to the numbers I quoted from other sources in my previous message
>> (projected 28% of worldwide server shipments and redeployments by 2008;
>> 16% of enterprises expecting over half of the company servers to run Linux
>> in 2005).
>
>To me this seems high. There is still a lot of Solaris, AIX, and HP/UX
>out there not to mention Windows: Especially on Exchange and other non-
>database servers.

Thanks for proving my point. :-)

>>>>Within the context of databases used as backend to ERP packages, more
>>>>functionality of the database is irrelevant.
>>>
>>>Nonsense. That is absolute nonsense. If one were to agree with your
>>>statement one would have to also agree with the statement that much
>>>of the functionality of SAP, PeopleSoft, Siebel, Oracle CRM, and Onyx
>>>are unnecessary: And they are the industry leaders.
>>
>> Maybe I didn't explain myself too well. The context of the discussion was:
>> small (I'll stick to your terminology) companies running ERP with MSDE as
>> back end - if they outgrow MSDE and need to move to a larger DBMS, SQL
>> Server Standard edition is the perfect choice. Those companies won't use
>> the claimed extra functionality of Oracle. If the ERP package needed that
>> functionality, it wouldn't run on MSDE. If it runs on MSDE, it uses
>> functionality present in MS SQL Server and it won't suddenly start to use
>> extra functionality if Oracle is used instead.
>>
>> Best, Hugo
>
>My experience in the US, which to be honest includes almost no
>company that would be defined as "small" is that the smallest
>ERP vendor they deal with wouldn't even consider saying MSDE to
>them for fear of being laughed out of the building.

Considering that you define all companies with less than 10,000 employees as "small", I can only agree that MSDE would not be a viable option as ERP backend for companies that you don't define as "small".

Companies with tens to hundreds of employees can run an ERP package with MSDE backend without problems. With thousands of employees, it depends on how the ERP package is used and the quality of the application whether MSDE will be pushed to it's limits or handle the load easily.

ERP companies are more and more targetting the market of companies that you call small, or even companies that I call small. Now that all big companies either have an ERP solution running or have decided that building their custom software is cheaper than buying and customizing an ERP package, the ERP vendors NEED to find new markets.

Check out http://www11.sap.com/solutions/smb/index.aspx for just one example - you'll note SAP specifically targetting businesses ranging "from 10 to several hundred employees".

>I was consulting with one major vendor about 5 years ago and they
>called me because when they hit the Asian market with their product
>running on SQL Server and Windows they couldn't even get an
>appointment to demo it.

And you are sure that this was ONLY caused by the SQL Server/Windows backend? No other factors involved?

>Obviously your experience in your country and other people in
>their country may experience different things. But here, in the
>US Pacific Northwest, anyone that offered a serious product on
>MSDE would have a hard time getting past the receptionist even
>if they brought her flowers and a latte'.

That's your experience, obviously. But it's not an experience that everyone would agree to. Consider Xerox, for instance - not exactly a small company, right? They are using MSDE for one of their printer management solutions, and they are not ashamed of it - in fact, they have allowed MS to publish their situation as a case study: http://www.microsoft.com/sql/msde/productinfo/casestudy.asp?CaseStudyID=14888

Best, Hugo

-- 

(Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)