I wasn't referring to the speed of systems, but the rate of progress in our industry. Because relational theory falsely required 1NF, for example, as an industry we focused on unimportant aspects of databases for too long, rather than making good progress in software development / database applications, on the whole. I might have stated it poorly again, so let me know if this wasn't any clearer. Thanks. --dawn
Dawn M. Wolthuis Tincat Group, Inc. www.tincat-group.com Take and give some delight today. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-u2- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 10:59 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [U2] Companies going belly up converting from PICK/MV > > In a message dated 5/17/2004 6:25:49 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > > I think that SQL-based DBMS's and the faith > > people have (and are taught to have) in the application of relational > > theories as THE way to approach data just might have something to do > with > > the lack of progress and huge INCREASES in costs to companies using > > databases. > > > > Sorry I don't follow that. Are you suggesting that somehow first- > relational > databases have a superior edge with today's technology, versus > multi-relational databases? > I'm not sure I'm following your argument as to why the speed of today's > systems is a factor in deciding to use first-relational databases. > Thanks. > Will ------- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.u2ug.org/listinfo/u2-users
