On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Jon 'maddog' Hall <mad...@li.org> wrote: >>The answer doesn't scale. > Sorry, it scaled with the information you gave me.
John, *you* provided the information that everyone should always be trying to inovate. If I misunderstood your point, my bad. My point is, when I have a junior engineer writing the database backend using Java, I'm going to ask that he uses JDBC, and not some 'new, open sourced NoSQL database engine'. Because I don't have a requirement that cannot be met with the tools at hand. And yes, I have that exact situation, and it annoys them to no end that it's using Derby, and not MS SQL Server embedded. > o First of all, I am talking about 1995...so that was about sixteen > years ago. Even if one woman's life was saved in those sixteen years, > it was worth it in my book. And *that* innovation was worth it. The point is, writing something in perl to parse some data as opposed to C# is *NOT INNOVATIVE*. > o Secondly, part of the problem was to decompose the program, which > allows it to run well on your quad-core Xeon > > You asked a question, I gave an answer. The question is, do you want something which is straitforward implemented a billion different ways for no other reason then to have everyone have a different solution. -- -- Thomas _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
