Re: Relational Systems set back DP by at least 10 yrs.

> Relational databases: > > I had great difficulty in controlling my mirth while I > read the self-congratulatory article, "Database Systems: Achievements > and Opportunities" (Oct 1991, p110), because its authors consider > _relational databases_ to be one of the greatest achievements of the > past decades. As a designer of commercial manufacturing applications > >etc > Henry G. Baker > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > Having not read the article in question I cannot comment on whether it did or did not take a one sided view of the impact of relational databases. But I still find problems with the opinions expressed in the letter. AS a Computer Professional (I hope :-) specialising in relational databases (I think? Uh :-) I know that relational databases are not a panacea. They are a tool for doing a certain range of jobs. To deny that they have their place and to say that they are a wholly backward step is to deny a whole range of application areas that require the facilities provided by a relational database. I hope that no database specialist given a requirement for high transaction processing plus relatively stable user views of the data would deny that hierarchic and network databases have their place. Most of the banks still use this technology for this purpose for example. But, where user views change or view priorities cannot be fully determined or views cannot be fully defined and transaction volume and performance requirements are within defined limits, then there are good reasons for considering and using relational databases and relational techniques. No Also if the technical recommendations are ignored by management then I would say that the presenter of the recommendation has failed in his job. If management are swayed by marketing hype and lemming instinct then it is the job of the technical review to prove that the technique they prefer will not provide the required business benefit. If they still ignore you - then resign and laugh when it fails. But be sure it will fail before dismissing a technical method. I have no views (I have not yet used one) on the use of object databases except to say that object databases seem to mean different things to different people. I would love to see an industry standard definition of what object databases consist of. Cheers, Jim -------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: Jim Gordon Internet: jgordon@ssf-sys.DHL.COM Company: DHL Systems Inc Phone: (415) 358-5911 (Work) Address: 1700 S. Amphlett Blvd. (415) 882-9728 (Home) San Mateo, CA 94402 Fax: (415) 571-6429 --------------------------------------------------------------------