Re: Is a RDBMS needed?

Ah yes, pointers..... bringing back horrific reminders of my C days.... 
pointers, pointers to pointers, pointers to functions..... 


Now all I have to worry about is 5 page execution plans and being the dumbass 
of 
the year. WOOT!

RF


 Robert G. Freeman
Master Principal Consultant, Oracle Corporation, Oracle ACE
Author of various books on RMAN, New Features and this shorter signature line.
Blog: http://robertgfreeman.blogspot.com


Note: THIS EMAIL IS NOT AN OFFICIAL ORACLE SUPPORT COMMUNICATION. It is just 
the 
opinion of one Oracle employee. I can be wrong, have been wrong in the past and 
will be wrong in the future. If your problem is a critical production problem, 
you should always contact Oracle support for assistance. Statements in this 
email in no way represent Oracle Corporation or any subsidiaries and reflect 
only the opinion of the author of this email.




________________________________
From: Stephane Faroult <sfaroult@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: cicciuxdba@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: dbvision@xxxxxxxxxxxx; oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wed, June 29, 2011 8:45:47 AM
Subject: Re: Is a RDBMS needed?

On 06/29/2011 04:13 PM, Guillermo Alan Bort wrote:
> hey, I want to get paid 500$ a day... where do I sign up? is that for 
>consulting or for regular dba job? I can code pretty decent pl/sql as well :-P
> 
> anyway, slightly moving this farther off topic, does anyone here know 
> anything 
>about object oriented databases? I'm interesting in Gemstone in particular. 
>What 
>are they, what are the differences and what are they used for? How do they 
>store 
>data? what are the differences with multidimensional databases?
> 
> I had a java developer who hates rdbms telling me that RDBMS were dead (what 
> a 
>surprise) and that the future of persitence was in nosql and that nonsense.
> 
> cheers
> Alan.-

Alan,

  Concerning OO databases, I'm going to be anecdotal - back in 1993, I was 
travelling in California with my wife and we met some of her former colleagues 
(she had worked a couple of years in Silicon Valley). One of them was then 
working with an OO database vendor. He was pretty gloomy, saying that he 
company 
had been around for about 5 years and wasn't giving any sign of taking off - 
yet 
it was then one of the main players in the field.
  I don't think the situation, 18 years later, is any better (the company still 
exists, and they now have "NoSQL" on their home page). In my view, it's a case 
of survival of the fittest. I have no doubt that these products have their use 
in some niches (like you might say it's hard to beat sequential files for logs).

When Codd designed the relational model, it was partly to get rid of the 
pointer-based navigation that was plaguing the so called "Codasyl" (network) 
model. There was a legendary debate back in 1974 between Codd and Bachman (the 
Codasyl champion)  - you may be interested by this (long) interview of Bachman, 
he refers to the OO "model" page 105/106: 
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1141882 - which he still seems to favor.
Pointers are fine as long as you don't need to change things and maintain the 
application. By the way, as according to Joel Spolsky only 40% of developers 
understand pointers, my guess is that today's Java-trained developers probably 
have a harder-time really understanding how all this works than their 
counterparts of the 60s and 70s, who generally were of another caliber.

SF




--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Other related posts: