Hear hear!!!!! Absolutely!   I once looked at a system migration to an IBM
relational dbms, and armed with volumes of data and transactions, asked the
IBM guy what sort of response/access times we could expect (within known
budgets, hardware plan etc), and his response was "that's just a matter of
hardware, doesn't concern me".......sort of a 'never mind the quality, feel
the length' answer.

jp


RDBMS have become more prevalent because of marketing more than anything
else.

Ray Shahan

-----Original Message-----
From: HP-3000 Systems Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Mark Wonsil
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 3:07 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] Migration recommendations; PRELIMINARY INQUIRY

> A relational database is a collection of data items organized as a set
> of tables from which data can be accessed or reassembled in many
> different ways without having to reorganize the database tables.

The term relational comes from relational mathematics, i.e. set theory.
This
is why there are union and intersection (join) functions.

> Eloquence from my understanding is built upon B-tree structures.  To
> access the data, the engine has to navigate the tree structure of key
> values.

I was corrected by Fred White once: There are no such things as
relational,
network or hierarchical databases. There is only relational, network and
hierarchical access.

> This is what is known as a hierarchical database structure, which is
> what IMAGE is.

In a hierarchical database, a child set can only have one parent. In a
network
database, the children can have multiple parents.

Image is a "simple network" database. Its children can have multiple
parents
but can't be parents to other children which is possible in a full
network
database like IDMS.

> RDBMS have become more prevalent due to several facts, one big one
> already mentioned is SQL.  The other is flexibility.

ImageSQL *is* an SQL interface for Image, so Adam's point stands that
having
an SQL interface does not a relational database make.

> Doing something like adding a field in a hierarchical database can
force
> changes across the entire application.  Which is typically not the
case
> with a relational database.

I assume you mean that one can cascade updates/deletes? This is not
built into
Image but it certainly could have been, especially with the advent of
Critical
Item Update.

> Some shops are willing to live with the limitations because Retrieving
> data from Hierarchical databases is historically faster due to the
same
> organizational structure that limits the flexibility.

True.

Mark W.

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *