Re: Why there is no controlfile in Informix like Oracle ?

Daniel Morgan said: > Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > >> Mark Townsend said: >> >> >>>>On the other hand, Oracle did not have such excellent tools for data >>>>management and manipulation as external entities (neither did DB2, >>>>Sybase or >>>>Ingres for that matter so this is not an indictment of Oracle), so they >>>>chose >>>>a different path and created PL/SQL as a full fledged programming >>>>language. >>>> >>> >>>I'm sure they weren't as polished as Perform and Ace, but Oracle also >>>had Forms (SQL*Forms) and Reporting tools (SQL*Rpt) available long >>>before PL/SQL became available in the engine (Oracle 7). Also Pro*COBOL, >>>Pro*Fortran etc for embedded SQL. It wasn't a lack of supporting tools >>>that drove the development of PL/SQL. >> >> >> I'm not sure I'd count SQL*Report as a tool. "Waste of space", maybe, >> but >> not a tool. > > Not for its time. What were the other options available for relational > databases back in the 80's? Your bias is showing. By "relational databases", I assume you mean "Oracle", because Informix had Ace and 4GL back in the 80s, Unify had Accell, etc. Last time I looked (which was probably in the 90s), SQL*Report didn't run on anything but Oracle, and that, only badly. -- Bye now, Obnoxio "C'est pas parce qu'on n'a rien ' dire qu'il faut fermer sa gueule" - Coluche "I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't get my head up my ass" - JCH "Ogni uomo mi guarda come se fossi una testa di cazzo" - Marco http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html sending to informix-list

Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > Daniel Morgan said: > >>Obnoxio The Clown wrote: >> >> >>>Mark Townsend said: >>> >>> >>> >>>>>On the other hand, Oracle did not have such excellent tools for data >>>>>management and manipulation as external entities (neither did DB2, >>>>>Sybase or >>>>>Ingres for that matter so this is not an indictment of Oracle), so they >>>>>chose >>>>>a different path and created PL/SQL as a full fledged programming >>>>>language. >>>>> >>>> >>>>I'm sure they weren't as polished as Perform and Ace, but Oracle also >>>>had Forms (SQL*Forms) and Reporting tools (SQL*Rpt) available long >>>>before PL/SQL became available in the engine (Oracle 7). Also Pro*COBOL, >>>>Pro*Fortran etc for embedded SQL. It wasn't a lack of supporting tools >>>>that drove the development of PL/SQL. >>> >>> >>>I'm not sure I'd count SQL*Report as a tool. "Waste of space", maybe, >>>but >>>not a tool. >> >>Not for its time. What were the other options available for relational >>databases back in the 80's? > > > Your bias is showing. By "relational databases", I assume you mean > "Oracle", because Informix had Ace and 4GL back in the 80s, Unify had > Accell, etc. Last time I looked (which was probably in the 90s), > SQL*Report didn't run on anything but Oracle, and that, only badly. Bias? In the 80's I was doing nothing but Cobol. The point is you criticized a tools made specifically for working with a relational database. Doing so must be done in context. The context was that it was pretty much the only game in town. -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)

Daniel Morgan wrote: > Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > >> Daniel Morgan said: >> >>> Obnoxio The Clown wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Mark Townsend said: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>> On the other hand, Oracle did not have such excellent tools for data >>>>>> management and manipulation as external entities (neither did DB2, >>>>>> Sybase or >>>>>> Ingres for that matter so this is not an indictment of Oracle), so >>>>>> they >>>>>> chose >>>>>> a different path and created PL/SQL as a full fledged programming >>>>>> language. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I'm sure they weren't as polished as Perform and Ace, but Oracle also >>>>> had Forms (SQL*Forms) and Reporting tools (SQL*Rpt) available long >>>>> before PL/SQL became available in the engine (Oracle 7). Also >>>>> Pro*COBOL, >>>>> Pro*Fortran etc for embedded SQL. It wasn't a lack of supporting tools >>>>> that drove the development of PL/SQL. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I'm not sure I'd count SQL*Report as a tool. "Waste of space", maybe, >>>> but >>>> not a tool. >>> >>> >>> Not for its time. What were the other options available for relational >>> databases back in the 80's? >> >> >> >> Your bias is showing. By "relational databases", I assume you mean >> "Oracle", because Informix had Ace and 4GL back in the 80s, Unify had >> Accell, etc. Last time I looked (which was probably in the 90s), >> SQL*Report didn't run on anything but Oracle, and that, only badly. > > > Bias? In the 80's I was doing nothing but Cobol. The point is you > criticized a tools made specifically for working with a relational > database. Doing so must be done in context. The context was that it > was pretty much the only game in town. It was not the only game in town. There was, as the clown suggested, quite a few contenders. Unify smoked too much of their own bs and fell by the wayside, not for technical reasons, just didn't make the right moves when the opportunities came their way. They had several innovations, and their training program basically was " a secretary could use our stuff it's so easy to use" . I forgot most of what they were about, but I think Unify-Accell had some kind of novel c-code generator, and menu-generator-4GL. They had a very fast engine if I recall that ran on very small, low-memory systems, like the first iterations of Informix. But their story was familiar to Informix, just missed opportunity after the next. Sybase, Ingres, Empress, Progress, Watcom, Filepro, etc. etc. Ingres could make a comeback in open source, maybe Informix should take the plunge. Progress to this day has a very novel report writer, and menu-based 4GL. Sybase by Larry's own admission was a problem, but Sybase shot themselves in the foot with fantastic claims in their 10x product, and their lost credibility on that one to this day haunts them. Plus they just didn't have much more than stored procedures--everything was on the command-line. But they were definitely popular in Sun shops, just no tools and no performance. Oracle in the late 80's and early 90's was trying to get in to the big SMP and NUMA space, but I think they ended up having to rewrite the engine to get it right for SMP if I'm not mistaken. But it was hardly the only game in town. There were also quite a few contenders in real-time UNIX, Empress is still pushing on RT-Unix. DEC in the 80's was pushing VAX RDB, which today is a novelty that just won't die, check out OpenVMS, egad! Informix ACE was easier to use than SQL*Report, but it was also a smaller footprint, and ran on smaller systems. Oracle is still a pig to this day but hardly the only game in town--ask PeopleSoft. 8-)