On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 11:03:57AM -0400, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On 6/8/06, Chris Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org> wrote:
> >smarlowe@g2switchworks.com (Scott Marlowe) writes:
> >> To me, the real argument is, "Is SQL so lacking that it should be
> >> replaced". In what REAL measurable ways is SQL lacking so badly
> >> we should toss it and start over? It's not perfect, that's for
> >> sure. But what's the investment on starting over, and the
> >> possible traction of a non-SQL database in a largely SQL driven
> >> market?
> >
> >The only visible alternative, at this point, is Tutorial D, and it
> >doesn't particularly excite me...
>
> Alphora. I don't think it meets the definition of market traction
> (and it overlays on top of sql), but it's pretty neat.
It may be neat, but it's not Date's Relational Model because it allows
NULLs.
Cheers,
D
--
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666
Skype: davidfetter
Remember to vote!