On May 6, 2004, at 2:06 PM, Andrew Piskorski wrote:
On Thu, May 06, 2004 at 01:21:28PM -0500, Puneet Kishor wrote:
they are as real a database as one wants them to be. Sure, they don't support ACID compliance, but I am not sure if they are created by
Ugh, that particular argument is one I should not have started. My apologies to all, and let's just let that one lie.
;-). No problem.
I have recently created a pretty useful app for a client using Perl/DBI, DBD-ODBC and Access. Given how fluid the design was throughout the development, I simply could not have done so with SQLite because of the lack of an ALTER command.
What makes you so dependent on "alter table" in your development? .. Is that the situation you find yourself in? I.e., you are not developing something new from scratch, but are making extensive changes to an already system already in heavy Production use?
yup and yup... I am developing something new from scratch, and I then I am making extensive changes to the system developed by me and already in use.
In this particular case, as the app developed, the client came up with new ideas, functionality... par for course. Which meant going in and changing column names, types, widths, etc. Access made it really easy... clickety-click. done. Some of it may have been easy with Oracle as well... but not because of Oracle but because of TOAD. Same with SQL Server... it is the Enterprise Mgr that makes it easy.
So, going back to my argument -- the real-ness of a db is the composite of its database-ness and its ease-of-use-ness.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
