RE: Is a RDBMS needed?

Humm,  Another feeble attempt to replace what 20 years+ of rdbms
engineering has already done.  Sorry to say that it's not the first and
probably will not be the last.  This is especially true with the JAVA
NOSQL crowd who sooner or later have to give in to the RDBMS since they
don't want to tackle the recovery, ACID compliance, and other issues
that people like Oracle, Microsoft and PostGreSql (to name a few) have
already fixed.  Would not be the first time that a technology appeared
to be the next best slice of bread only to die before getting off the
pad, anyone ever hear of Ada?  Few billions of US tax payer dollars went
down that black hole to no good end and that was supported by one of the
largest institutions in the world, the US Pentagon.  So much for who
supports it.  BTW: If you've ever heard of PL/SQL then you've heard of
Ada, by another name.

 

And no, you are no dinosaur.  The young have to be given their chance to
explore, but in the end many ideas that looked good at the time don't
withstand the test of time and some are just way before their time, like
the old Edsel (push button transmission where the underlying
technologies had not yet matured sufficiently).

 

Richard Goulet

Senior Oracle DBA/Na Team Leader

 

From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Blake Wilson
Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2011 11:23 AM
To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Is a RDBMS needed?

 

Here at the University of Western Ontario we are looking at replacing
our current Learning Management System. The current choices seem to be
similar in technology and infrastructure - web tier, load balancer,
application tier, back end RDBMS and some sort of content management
system for the course content.

However, the next release of one of our options will not have a RDBMS in
the solution. It will be replaced by Apache Jackrabbit. The new system
will have everything treated as content, including grades, test
questions and answers, discussion threads, syllabi, personal profiles,
chat messages, and so on.

This seems like quite a departure from normal RDBMS based solutions. Is
this a good idea? Am I being a dinosaur by thinking that this is not a
good idea? Do I need to keep up with the times? Is this the future of
databases? This really looks to me like a return to design of 20 years
ago.

Thanks,
Blake Wilson

Other related posts: