 | |
Re: What so special about PostgreSQL and other RDBMS?
comp.databases.sybase comp.databases.sybase
 |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
 
| |||
| |||
|
Re: What so special about PostgreSQL and other RDBMS? -
05-10-2004
, 01:17 PM
|
Quirk wrote: Son, it sounds like you're the victim of some simplistic advise from database 101 book: Ok Dad, it sounds like you're the victim of the patronizing ass school of discourse. My condolences to your coleagues. Apparently you went to that school too ... and graduated with honors. -- Daniel Morgan http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...ad/oad_crs.asp http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...oa/aoa_crs.asp damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply) |
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
Bottom line, whem it comes to medium/large application/database or even CRM./ERP... would MySQL/PostgreSQL have a problem to handle it? I mean, when the code is set up right and the database structure design is right. an honest answer would be appreciated. |
to break in. Then it would likely be both as fragile and as transparent
as a sheet of glass.
Does anyone really believe that if SAP and PeopleSoft could make as
much or more money writing their products to work against these
products they wouldn't? Does anyone really believe that CFOs and CIOs,
looking at their budgets, wouldn't be running to these products en-mass?
I am a strong supporter of the open-source community. I have and will
continue to advocate management dump MS Office for OpenOffice. But I
would never risk any organization's data, read that business assets,
and I can't think of too many others in my position that would.
--
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...ad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...oa/aoa_crs.asp
damorgan@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)
#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
Bottom line, whem it comes to medium/large application/database or even CRM./ERP... would MySQL/PostgreSQL have a problem to handle it? |
quite closely recently with MySQL AG, and PostegreSQL has some of the
smartest people in the industry helping to develop it, and there are
many medium/large applications that run very well on both.
However, both, like all software, do have their deficiencies, and
there is no question that comercial products, Oracle in particular,
has functionality that
neither offer.
The answer must be made on a case by case basis, after thourough
design and analysis.
The best advice you can heed is that your application should be
programmed in such a way that it is not dependant on any external
dependancy for wich you do not have source code. Either by only using
products for which you do have source code, or abstracting access when
you do not, and that your data should be archived in such a way that
you will never lose access to it.
Quote:
|
I mean, when the code is set up right and the database structure design is right. an honest answer would be appreciated. |
cases.
Cheers.
#4
| |||
| |||
|
|
Probably. But only right up until it crashed or some cracker tried to break in. Then it would likely be both as fragile and as transparent as a sheet of glass. |
"As a cryptography and computer security expert, I have never
understood the current fuss about the open source software movement.
In the cryptography world, we consider open source necessary for good
security; we have for decades. Public security is always more secure
than proprietary security. It's true for cryptographic algorithms,
security protocols, and security source code. For us, open source
isn't just a business model; it's smart engineering practice."
-- Bruce Schneier, Founder and CTO Counterpane Internet Security, Inc.
http://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-...rceandSecurity
"Microsoft is really good at producing really cool stuff. Security
isn't cool, I want to produce good stuff and customers want dancing
pigs."
-- Carl Ellison, security architect at Microsoft Corp.
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1386333,00.asp
Quote:
|
Does anyone really believe that if SAP and PeopleSoft could make as much or more money writing their products to work against these products they wouldn't? |
http://www.mysql.com/news-and-events...e_2003_16.html
Quote:
|
Does anyone really believe that CFOs and CIOs, looking at their budgets, wouldn't be running to these products en-mass? |
http://www.dwheeler.com/oss_fs_why.html
#5
| |||
| |||
|
|
Evidently, there are too many people around in the field, who never *learned* to develop robust applications and databases, and who mainly deliver software which is hacked together. Of course, this mentality perfectly suits the Open Source Community. |
opinion about MySQL?
Kennett
#6
| |||
| |||
|
|
"Doug Hutcheson" doug.blot.hutcheson (AT) nrm (DOT) b...ot.gov.blot.au> wrote in message news:<QySqc.2189$IH5.98940 (AT) news (DOT) optus.net.au>... |
Quote:
|
Proposition 2: There are circumstances under which my client is better protected against commercial or accidental events, if I have coded my application in such a way (by use of a database abstraction layer) that migrating my application to a different database management system is made very easy. I agree with that proposition. And also note that simply issolating database functions in your code is a easy and light way to abstract data access, just to make this clear for those that keep insisting that database access abstraction means automaticaly including a third tier: For instance, in pseudocode: function myapp_query(query) if not connected prop_connect result = prop_query(query) for each result data(ii++) = prop_fetch(result) if not set cleanup set cleanup connection callback prop_disconnect return data |
in your codebase with something like the myapp_query function in
it?
If you do, could you post it?
--
Galen Boyer
#7
| |||
| |||
|
|
Noons <wizofoz2k (AT) yahoo (DOT) com.au.nospam> wrote on discussing these things in this thread, it's pretty clear to me we are dealing with zealots and those looking for genuine answers have It's a pity that you have considered my reply as that of a zealot. I did concede a few points and debated yours in a civilized fashion. Sorry if you thought I was refering to you specificly, rather I was lamenting about the general quality of the responses in this thread, like those of Volker, moronic zealot extraordinaire, a man so stupid, that when I suggested he didn't know what a fallacy was, he thought I was critisising his _english_ instead of his knowledge of logic and the standards of debate. However, there is clear zealotry in your post, for example: You said: "It's with freeware that you need a STACK of wrappers to protect you from sudden underlying code changes! Not with commercial software!" See: no other reasoning is given why underlying code may suddenly change other than in one case it is _free_, in the other case it is _commercial_. This is not a reasoned argument, but rather the faith of a zealot. Since neither freeness nor commercialness has a direct impact on code stability, but rather the release management practices of the development group has. There are badly managed free software projects, and badly managed nonfree ones, your argument is therefore a fallacy, although your english, like Volker's is great! However, thanks for giving me the opportunity of stating this in a less civilized language (remember: YOU started the language, not I): Please, use any language you like, you are quite welcome if my post has given you a greater since of liberty. none of your points is by definition a "world truth". When I say things like "the readers can make up their own minds, as they should in any case" and "these are suggestions" (both present in the post you are responding too) what makes you think I am defining "world truths?" You don't provide a single supporting argument that does not involve your interpretation of what software makers would do rather than what they in fact do. Oh please, I have provided many clear aruments throughout this thread, in my last message I even posted pseudocode, how much clearer do you want? Your stupid deduction that somehow only your view of the world is worthy the title of "developer" defines you as the idiotic and moronic type of geek that thinks the world was invented yesterday by your kind and all that came before is just amateur effort. In character, I might say. You know nothing about my character or world view. Amateur effort is amateur effort, on it's own it is neither old nor new. None of the ideas I have suggested are particularily new. The existince of a large body of free software is fairly new, however the practice of acquiring source licences for critical dependencies is not, and serves more or less the same function. Abstraction is not new, good archiving techniques are not new. A developer who did not understand these techniques was an amateur in 1976, just as much as today. You and your little group can go and drop dead as this thread ends here for me: I don't have time to argue ANYTHING with "kewl" people. I'm sorry the barbs you endured in your primary school still hurt you so much, perhaps therapy can help. Not worth the effort: the worst disasters in IT development I've ever seen in 30 years of career have been prompted by your kind and I don't like my name associated with that sort of unprofessional reputation. It never pays in the long run. Let's see, I am suggestion abstracting dependencies, getting source code when you can and keeping your archives human readable. What sort of disasters can come of this? The worst that can be said is that, if implemented poorly, these suggestions may cause performance degradation, hardly Godzilla crushing Tokyo. However, It is quite easy to imagine disasters as a consequence of not following these suggestions; customers lost by not being able to support their database platform, production applications obsoleted by obsoleted debendencies, unusable archives and lost permenant records. Goodbye and keep developing for a non-existent market. It has a brilliant future. Which market is that? The market for good applications? I agree that is too small and that too many firms are screwed by bad developers and protectionist suppliers, however I assure you the marker for developers who understand good, well designed, open systems is doing quite well, and growing. And yes, I DO have a future and nothing you can possibly do will stop it. Hey, I only want to improve your future with my advise! Here, I'll give you another tip: A "binding" is a term used to describe a native function (or method) that provides access to an external dependency. For instance, 'MySQL', the database server, is a dependency, in PHP, the function mysql_query is called a binding. 'libcurl', the URL handling library, is a dependency, the PHP function 'curl_exec', is a binding. An 'API' ("application programming interface") is the interface provided by the dependency itself for external access, frequently for C, the 'binding' is your platform's _native_ function or method that provides access to this API, not the API itself. Each of these terms, 'Dependency', 'Binding' and 'API' have distinct meanings, and now, after a 30 year career, you can finaly understand them! I hope this helps. Regards, Dmytri. |
#8
| |||
| |||
|
|
OMG. this argument is still alive... IS THERE A PUNCH LINE ANYWAY NEAR? |
A: "How much free beer do you have?"
jg
--
@home.com is bogus.
http://www.levenez.com/unix/
|
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.