Re: No primary keys
----- Original Message ----- From: Andrew Hamm <ahamm@sanderson.net.au> To: <informix-list@iiug.org> Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2001 5:23 PM Subject: Re: No primary keys > > Might I at this point also provoke another religious war by asking "why the > hell would anyone use SE anyway?" Because it's SO easy to use with little or no maintenance needed. It's perfect for small to medium-sized companies. Many of our customers are small to medium-sized companies and we much prefer to sell them SE since it requires little or no maintenance on our part. Just my .02 worth. Candy -- Candy McCall ONLINE Computing, Inc. (candym@olcinc.com)
Candy McCall wrote in message <93ivmf$ns5$1@news.xmission.com>... > >Because it's SO easy to use with little or no maintenance needed. >It's perfect for small to medium-sized companies. Many of our >customers are small to medium-sized companies and we much >prefer to sell them SE since it requires little or no maintenance >on our part. > >Just my .02 worth. > it all adds up... just being cheeky. SE frightens me sometimes... glad to have seen the back of it, although it's back to the future kinda since we've been mucking around with Oracle;-) Files everywhere!
In the year of Our Lord Thu, 11 Jan 2001 11:58:21 +1100, "Andrew Hamm" <ahamm@sanderson.net.au> broke a vow of silence to utter: >Candy McCall wrote in message <93ivmf$ns5$1@news.xmission.com>... >> >>Because it's SO easy to use with little or no maintenance needed. >>It's perfect for small to medium-sized companies. Many of our >>customers are small to medium-sized companies and we much >>prefer to sell them SE since it requires little or no maintenance >>on our part. >> >>Just my .02 worth. > >it all adds up... >just being cheeky. >SE frightens me sometimes... glad to have seen the back of it, although it's >back to the future kinda since we've been mucking around with Oracle;-) >Files everywhere! SE frightens you? How come?
obnoxio@hotmail.com (Obnoxio The Clown) writes: > In the year of Our Lord Thu, 11 Jan 2001 11:58:21 +1100, "Andrew Hamm" > <ahamm@sanderson.net.au> broke a vow of silence to utter: > > >Candy McCall wrote in message <93ivmf$ns5$1@news.xmission.com>... > >> > >>Because it's SO easy to use with little or no maintenance needed. > >>It's perfect for small to medium-sized companies. Many of our > >>customers are small to medium-sized companies and we much > >>prefer to sell them SE since it requires little or no maintenance > >>on our part. > >> > >>Just my .02 worth. > > > >it all adds up... > >just being cheeky. > >SE frightens me sometimes... glad to have seen the back of it, although it's > >back to the future kinda since we've been mucking around with Oracle;-) > >Files everywhere! > > SE frightens you? How come? Aha! Someone connected a eliza-bot (M-x doctor to emacs fans) to this group and called it Obnoxio.... Evreything seems too fall in place now Thomas
In the year of Our Lord 11 Jan 2001 17:56:50 +0100, Thomas Parsli <thomas.parsli@startsiden.no> broke a vow of silence to utter: >obnoxio@hotmail.com (Obnoxio The Clown) writes: > >> In the year of Our Lord Thu, 11 Jan 2001 11:58:21 +1100, "Andrew Hamm" >> <ahamm@sanderson.net.au> broke a vow of silence to utter: >> >> >Candy McCall wrote in message <93ivmf$ns5$1@news.xmission.com>... >> >> >> >>Because it's SO easy to use with little or no maintenance needed. >> >>It's perfect for small to medium-sized companies. Many of our >> >>customers are small to medium-sized companies and we much >> >>prefer to sell them SE since it requires little or no maintenance >> >>on our part. >> >> >> >>Just my .02 worth. >> > >> >it all adds up... >> >just being cheeky. >> >SE frightens me sometimes... glad to have seen the back of it, although it's >> >back to the future kinda since we've been mucking around with Oracle;-) >> >Files everywhere! >> >> SE frightens you? How come? > >Aha! Someone connected a eliza-bot (M-x doctor to emacs fans) to this group >and called it Obnoxio.... >Evreything seems too fall in place now And how does that make you feel?
Obnoxio The Clown wrote in message <3a5d8733.3308016@News.CIS.DFN.DE>... > >SE frightens you? How come? > Well firstly, the tongue was in close proximity to the cheek when I said that (I mean the cheek on the side of my face, for those who are wondering). I was just irritated by the need to get all users off a db prior to an archive, the need to age the logging files, the irritating way that some table definitions got corrupted and then you couldn't fix them or drop them unless you did violence to some files; how people would sometimes try to move tables to a spacier filesystem without following the correct ritual and then it would be lost and locked out. Let's not forget the reliance on UNIX's arcane sequencing of buffer flushes which occasionally screwed data in the event of a crash, or having to rollforward db's during recovery after a crash, and a few other housekeeping things I'm beginning to forget now. The memory impact and lower performance also irritated me when cheap bastards insisted on using SE as a cost-cutting measure beyond the reasonable bounds of it's scope. It was a mild relief to see the back of SE - kind of like when Party of Five ends and NYPD starts. At least Online has had the concept of Reliability injected into it's design (I mean that in the technical computer-science sense) whereby a lot of that stuff was either automatic (fast recovery) or possible (ie online archiving) and being from the school of ASSERT or DIE programming, I like the idea of an engine that craps out to protect the data rather than plug on with creeping corruption. But having said that, I wish it didn't actually have to happen... It's just a case of "The King is dead, long live the King". I realise that the new king has his own peculiar manifestations of inbreeding, but you've got to put your faith in something - now THAT's gonna provoke a religious war!