Re: Dreaming About Redesigning SQL
От | dwolt@iserv.net (Dawn M. Wolthuis) |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Dreaming About Redesigning SQL |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 6db906b2.0310100813.65b872d8@posting.google.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Dreaming About Redesigning SQL (seunosewa@inaira.com (Seun Osewa)) |
Ответы |
Re: Dreaming About Redesigning SQL
(Kevin Brown <kevin@sysexperts.com>)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Thank you, Seun, for asking your question with a bit of logic and not gut-reaction emotional baggage (and for also asking a question of me off-list so I could ramble). I'll try to make this more suscinct. First of all, I have read Codd's 1970 & 1974 ACM papers, as well as his "The Relational Model for Database Management, Version 2" book. I have also read several books by Chris Date and by Fabian Pascal. I held a dialog (that reads more like a monologue) with Pascal and it is reproduced in total if you scroll to the bottom of the http://store.tincat-group.com page and click on the Dick Pick / Ted Codd Blue Brothers parody picture. I had not been reading this news group until lately, but it strikes me that this is a group that might be very entertained by that dialog. I have a master's degree in mathematics and my father is a linguist. I find the language of mathematics and the mathematics of language both fascinating. My experience, however, is that I have run IT project teams working with a variety of databases (and languages) and have never seen any environment that is as agile for develoeprs (both productive from the start and easy to maintain) than the teams I have led that worked with the UniData database. I have worked with SQL as well as both older and newer database languages. So, nope, I'm not trolling. I've been doing some research the past couple of years and I'm convinced that it is time to do something new (and yet old) with data persistence. I favor using Java for a variety of reasons, but am comfortable with other languages as well, and think that using Java both for the software application and for the constraints on the data, rather than encoding constraints in some other language within a database, makes for both a more agile development approach AND, surprisingly enough, tends to make for better data integrity, although a lousy software developer can certainly mess up either environment. Separating the DBA from the software developer has definitely had a negative affect on the speed with which software is developed and maintained, but my experience (and intuition -- I don't, yet, have scientific evidence) tells me that the benefits purported by the approach of having a dba work on some centralized constraints on the persisted data outside of the context of the use of that data have not really come to fruition and/or are not worth the costs of using this approach (more on that some other time). So, while some might classify me as an idiot (men can be so emotional sometimes ;-), I have several graduate classes in logic to my credit and believe that I am approaching this topic quite logically, even if my summaries skip some of the logical steps in the process. I have thought about how to prove my points and since my point is really about agility and quality in application software development and maintenance, a competition to see what tools and techniques and what data persistence approaches win such a competition might be the best proof. The current industry benchmarks for databases tend to be SQL-based and highly political, so let's put different approaches to the test. Thanks for asking your question and not just assuming I'm a nut because I disagree with the current state of the industry on this topic. I'm sure there are gaps in my thinking and I know some of my opinions are based on intuition that arises from my experience, but I do hope to have more proof in the future. I am also very willing to adjust my opinions with convincing arguments and evidence and trust that there are some on this list who work similarly. --dawn seunosewa@inaira.com (Seun Osewa) wrote in message news:<ba87a3cf.0310092217.72098544@posting.google.com>... > dwolt@iserv.net (Dawn M. Wolthuis) wrote in message news:<6db906b2.0310091212.4f967cf5@posting.google.com>... > > I would suggest ditching the entire relational model (as both overly > > simplistic in its theory and overly complex in its implementation) and > > start with English (that is one of the other names for the GIRLS > > language). Note that language is also the starting point for putting > > data in XML documents, but it sure doesn't seem to be the starting > > point for XQuery, eh? > > > > --dawn > > Dawn M. Wolthuis > > www.tincat-group.com > > Please explain further. What do you really mean? Its natural for > everyone here to think every word in that post was a troll unless you > explain your views more clearly. You could not have expressed a more > unpopular/unsupportable combination of ideas! Exactly how would we go > about using language as a query tool? Is this AI? What would the > underlying model be knowing how redundant and imprecise language can > be? Tell what we may have missed. > > Seun Osewa
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:
Следующее
От: dwolt@iserv.net (Dawn M. Wolthuis)Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Dreaming About Redesigning SQL