InstantForum.NET v2.9.0SQLServerCentralhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/notifications@sqlservercentral.comWed, 19 Jun 2013 12:00:55 GMT20http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspxThis as gotten a little crazy here. I am closing this thread.Tue, 21 Apr 2009 08:33:23 GMTSteve Jones - SSC Editorhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx[quote][b]Lynn Pettis (4/20/2009)[/b][hr]Mr Dassin,You really have missed the point. [/quote]I get your point. I'll see what I can do.best,steveTue, 21 Apr 2009 02:58:20 GMTsteve dassinhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx[quote][b]wldhrs (4/20/2009)[/b][hr]the term is grist to the millplease stop being a ****i've -really- enjoyed this thread apart from your intrusions[/quote]Hi,Are you a messenger? If I'm wrong and you are more than that, well it came from my charitable side :-) In either case you could have picked a less deceitful way to get a receipt out of me.best,steveTue, 21 Apr 2009 02:20:08 GMTsteve dassinhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspxI agree.It was just about tolerable the first time, but not twice.The first time I let it go because it made me remember the word [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portmanteau][u]portmanteau[/u][/url]I think I am right in saying that forum pages are indexed by the likes of Google[sup]TM[/sup] - so your choice of word may end up being seen by audiences you did not anticipate.PaulMon, 20 Apr 2009 23:23:24 GMTPaul Whitehttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspxPeter, don't be as bad as the cause. ;-) Lots of us got mad at him for all the name calling. And, the etymology of the word you're using goes way over the edge for a forum that's supposed to populated by professionals.Mon, 20 Apr 2009 23:16:45 GMTJeff Modenhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspxLynnYes,:-),:cool:.Mr DassinEditor's Note: Post offensivePlease stop trying to sell an idea that is simply a wrapper for somebody else's already hugely advanced and developed concept.Mon, 20 Apr 2009 22:55:11 GMTwldhrshttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspxMr Dassin,You really have missed the point. Stop with the hyperbole and attacks on SQL Server (and all its cousins). Provide straight, well supported facts. Provide actual cases of the your "product" in actual use solving real world business problems. We can find tons of cases where SQL based systems are being used to solve real world business problems.All of us on this site (SSC) use SQL Server to support our organizations, and are doing so successfully. You have not provided us with anything that would even suggest that your "product" is even worth investigating for use in our organizations, and many of us don't have the time or energy to "play" with your "product" on our own time. We have other things that we can be doing that will actually help us with our own career development or even just to spend time with our own families, or other things we do outside of work (for instance it happens to be soccer season and I coach a U-12 soccer team and officiate youth and high school soccer).Mon, 20 Apr 2009 19:59:17 GMTLynn Pettishttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx[quote][b]bitbucket (4/19/2009)[/b][hr][quote][/quote][quote]From Dataphor SQL RAC Dataphor - Sql: what does Update..From mean? What is really wrong with the "UPDATE.. FROM.." syntax?This example uses MS Sql Server 2005andthe D4 language of Dataphor @[b]www.alphora.com[/b] [/quote] Yields [b]Internet Explorer cannot display the webpage[/b][url]http://tinyurl.com/27Z8PM [/url] - Is a redirection link taking one to [b]microsoft.public.sqlserver.programming [/b]I find this rather limiting - almost to the point of making Dataphor useless [quote](for example D4 will not returnnor address a table with duplicate key(s) or rows). [/quote][quote]The goal of sql isperformance oriented retrieval of large numbers of rows. The goalof Dataphor is toward application development which is lessconcerned with retrieval and more concerned with 'addressing' tables.[/quote]Further - The only reason for maintaining data in a database is to return data for other uses - thus dataphor appears not to be applicable to any real world useage. Sorry but at this point I gave up ... and that is from only reading a wee bit from your site[/quote]Hmm..there are people who think all the relational theory stuff is nothing but gibberish. Who cares what a theory says. Sql doesn't care so why should users. Why make a db where each table must have unique rows and unique rows only? You seem to saying give me duplicates or give me death.The battle cry of an sql server patriot :-) Well all can say is that when see a system called an 'RDBMS' if it supports duplicates it's a silent R. I suppose you couldn't imagine using a system without DISTINCT :-)You have a problem with not being able to access data? I'm only kidding :-)Sql is a 'plural' system. The often repeated phrase: sql is optimized for set based solutions really says it all. In fact you could say its optimized for big set based operations. But what about if you turned things around. What about a system that was optimized for accessing a 'single' row? After alla big chunk of application development is just that, a single row for a customer or patient. An update of an expression that is based on single rows of data. It's not that dataphor can't process lots of data but you can think of dataphor as what sql would be like if the concept of a single row where of primary importance. A lot of relational ideas are like trying to describe a particular situation where at the end you just say you really had to be there to understand. I'm trying to get people heads 'there' :-) best,steve[url=http://www.beyondsql.blogspot.com][b]www.beyondsql.blogspot.com[/b][/url]Mon, 20 Apr 2009 19:55:47 GMTsteve dassinhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx[quote][b]steve dassin (4/20/2009)[/b][hr][quote][b]dphillips (4/20/2009)[/b][hr]And by the way Steve Dassin, you may want to go re-read Snarky's comments.:blink:[/quote]Apparently in my haste to find an empathic voice I overlooked the true message this sardonic wit was sending me. Thank you so much for setting me straight. As for my 'pitch' perhaps I would have more success with you if I were hawking rice krispies or shaving cream. Ditch the pitch seems to be a popular rallying point here. Consider it my contribution of gin to your mill. But I do look forward to your insights in the future. I will give your comments and Pauls the scrutiny they deserve. :-)best,steve[url=http://www.beyondsql.blogspot.com][b]www.beyondsql.blogspot.com[/b][/url][/quote]the term is grist to the millplease stop being a *****i've -really- enjoyed this thread apart from your intrusionsMon, 20 Apr 2009 18:46:46 GMTwldhrshttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx[quote][b]steve dassin (4/20/2009)[/b][hr][quote][b]dphillips (4/20/2009)[/b][hr]And by the way Steve Dassin, you may want to go re-read Snarky's comments.:blink:[/quote]Apparently in my haste to find an empathic voice I overlooked the true message this sardonic wit was sending me. Thank you so much for setting me straight. As for my 'pitch' perhaps I would have more success with you if I were hawking rice krispies or shaving cream. Ditch the pitch seems to be a popular rallying point here. Consider it my contribution of gin to your mill. But I do look forward to your insights in the future. I will give your comments and Pauls the scrutiny they deserve. :-)best,steve[url=http://www.beyondsql.blogspot.com][b]www.beyondsql.blogspot.com[/b][/url][/quote]There is no winner or loser here. If we cannot communicate, then everyone loses. I am no judge... To refuse to recognize that several have stated dislike of the bluntness of the message and/or not make better on it, in general baffles me a bit. If that is the intended message...I am at a loss...Mon, 20 Apr 2009 18:20:34 GMTDPhillips-731960http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx[quote][b]dphillips (4/20/2009)[/b][hr]And by the way Steve Dassin, you may want to go re-read Snarky's comments.:blink:[/quote]Apparently in my haste to find an empathic voice I overlooked the true message this sardonic wit was sending me. Thank you so much for setting me straight. As for my 'pitch' perhaps I would have more success with you if I were hawking rice krispies or shaving cream. Ditch the pitch seems to be a popular rallying point here. Consider it my contribution of gin to your mill. But I do look forward to your insights in the future. I will give your comments and Pauls the scrutiny they deserve. :-)best,steve[url=http://www.beyondsql.blogspot.com][b]www.beyondsql.blogspot.com[/b][/url]Mon, 20 Apr 2009 17:08:39 GMTsteve dassinhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx[quote][b]Paul White (4/20/2009)[/b][hr][quote][b]dphillips (4/20/2009)[/b][hr]And by the way Steve Dassin, you may want to go re-read Snarky's comments.[/quote]Let it go dude :-)[/quote]ooommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmMon, 20 Apr 2009 16:33:01 GMTLynn Pettishttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx[quote][b]dphillips (4/20/2009)[/b][hr]And by the way Steve Dassin, you may want to go re-read Snarky's comments.[/quote]Let it go dude :-)Mon, 20 Apr 2009 16:30:49 GMTPaul Whitehttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspxAnd by the way Steve Dassin, you may want to go re-read Snarky's comments.:blink:Mon, 20 Apr 2009 15:39:06 GMTDPhillips-731960http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx[quote][b]steve dassin (4/17/2009)[/b][hr][quote][b]dphillips (4/17/2009)[/b][hr][quote][b]steve dassin (4/17/2009)[/b][hr]Please remember I'm not looking to play stump the grump :-). Go in with a positive attitude. Window shopping is ok. There's always a chance you'll see something you'll consider buying.(snipped some)best,steve[url=http://www.beyondsql.blogspot.com][b]www.beyondsql.blogspot.com[/b][/url][/quote]I have to admit, I'm a bit sketchy on your product. But I do know this, I come here to chat about SQL Server, not RAC.I also admit that I tend to have a bit of apathy for products or sales or messaging that use other's publicity to pitch their product.Nevertheless I don't see how the following pitch would bring the customers in:"I don't know if you guys have to be dragged into the 21 century or you just need a little push. I just hope I'm not dealing with cerebral cement.":doze:[/quote]Hello,No one is talking about the RAC utility here. Here's what I want to talk about:From Database Design » Relational Theory » New Relational Sub-Language? [url=http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums /Topic360790-374-2.aspx#bm473331][b]http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums /Topic360790-374-2.aspx#bm473331 [/b][/url][/quote]Your link is broken (remove space after Forums to use).Which product matters not. The pitch methods and copy is what I am referring to.Mon, 20 Apr 2009 15:14:29 GMTDPhillips-731960http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspxHey there Andrew, sorry the reference was so obscure. [quote][b]andrew gothard (4/19/2009)[/b][hr][quote][b]wldhrs (4/17/2009)[/b][hr][quote][b]RBarryYoung (4/16/2009) andrew gothard (4/15/2009) Jeff Moden (4/14/2009) Jim Russell (4/14/2009) Charles Kincaid (4/13/2009)[/b][hr][/quote]Okkkk....All of you, have, like, been taking a point of view that has only one common thread, and I would guess that Hunter S Thompson, if he were still allive, may not be unfamiliar with this context either.Could this thread be re--presented as an approach to -original- as opposed to -artificial- intelligence?No I'm not joking.[/quote]Sorry, but, EH?[/quote]"The Edge ... There is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over. The others -the living- are those who pushed their luck as far as they felt they could handle it, and then pulled back, or slowed down, or did whatever they had to when it came time to choose between Now and Later. But the edge is still Out there."- Hunter Stockton Thompson (July 18 1937 – February 20 2005)Creator of the technique of Gonzo journalism where the reporters involve themselves in the action to such an extent that they become central figures of their stories.It struck me that all these thread particpants were describing being in the midst of the development of an original form of thinking in which they were players.And that this thread, while starting as a geeky debate about syntax, was evolving into a discussion of the underpinnings of various syntaxes, both computer and human, and consequently the evolution of the original human intelligence that came up with the whole shebang. As opposed to a debate about the artificial (sorry, bad pun) intelligence of the development of compilers with specific intents. Mon, 20 Apr 2009 06:41:29 GMTwldhrshttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx[quote][b]steve dassin (4/20/2009)[/b][hr]A ya and nay. A wash. I'll take it :-)[/quote]...and everyone's happy. Cool.Mon, 20 Apr 2009 02:07:59 GMTPaul Whitehttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx[quote][b]Jeff Moden (4/19/2009)[/b][hr][quote][b]steve dassin (4/19/2009)[/b][hr]And there's nothing cheap in the ideas I'm trying to convey.[/quote]That's the point I've been trying to make. Some of your ideas are great... the manner in which you try to convey them isn't. Like you said, Res ipse loquitor.[/quote]A ya and nay. A wash. I'll take it :-)best,steveMon, 20 Apr 2009 01:44:38 GMTsteve dassinhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx[quote][b]Paul White (4/19/2009)[/b][hr]I have edited out my rant because the transaction was rolled back, and therefore it never logically existed.Anyone who saw it must have been experiencing 'dirty reads'.;-)Paul[/quote]Took your lead, transaction rolled back, completely!Sun, 19 Apr 2009 23:41:18 GMTLynn Pettishttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspxI have edited out my rant because the transaction was rolled back, and therefore it never logically existed.Anyone who saw it must have been experiencing 'dirty reads'.;-)PaulSun, 19 Apr 2009 23:22:12 GMTPaul Whitehttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx[quote][b]Paul White (4/19/2009)[/b][hr][quote][b]Lynn Pettis (4/19/2009)[/b][hr]And, as a final thought before I leave. As a professional, I must admit when I was wrong. Paul, I was wrong. Please except my apologies. And that includes another 50 lashes with a wet noodle for me. Let's see, I think that brings the total to 150. That'll work.[/quote]Hey, don't worry about - mistakes happen - all old news now. I could have left it a bit longer before hitting DEFCON 1 with my reply - so I'll accept my share too.Enough with the lashes already.Let's all move on. Nothing to see here... :-):cool:[/quote]It was your reply that made Jeff's comment "look eye" hit home for me and showed me my mistake.Thank you for being such a professional about it. It makes me feel better. I still feel bad, but better.Sun, 19 Apr 2009 22:04:32 GMTLynn Pettishttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx[quote][b]Lynn Pettis (4/19/2009)[/b][hr]And, as a final thought before I leave. As a professional, I must admit when I was wrong. Paul, I was wrong. Please except my apologies. And that includes another 50 lashes with a wet noodle for me. Let's see, I think that brings the total to 150. That'll work.[/quote]Hey, don't worry about - mistakes happen - all old news now. I could have left it a bit longer before hitting DEFCON 1 with my reply - so I'll accept my share too.Enough with the lashes already.Let's all move on. Nothing to see here... :-):cool:Sun, 19 Apr 2009 21:55:39 GMTPaul Whitehttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspxAnd, as a final thought before I leave. As a professional, I must admit when I was wrong. Paul, I was wrong. Please except my apologies. And that includes another 50 lashes with a wet noodle for me. Let's see, I think that brings the total to 150. That'll work.Sun, 19 Apr 2009 21:21:32 GMTLynn Pettishttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspxYou know, it's been a long day, I think it's time to get some sleep. Maybe then I can re-engage in a more meaningful dialog and hit the right buttons.Sun, 19 Apr 2009 21:17:28 GMTLynn Pettishttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx[quote][b]Paul White (4/19/2009)[/b][hr][quote][b]Lynn Pettis (4/19/2009)[/b][hr]NOW I SEE IT. Looks like I got the wrong QUOTE >ARRRRRGGGGG!!!!! I apologize, most profusely.50 lashes with a wet noodle![/quote]Now I'm confused :unsure:Perhaps I'll just go run some backups or something, and pop back later./Paul[/quote]We can be confused together. I was reading a different post, wanted to respond, but it appears I quoted the wrong post, and responded to yours thinking it was someone else. I again apologize so profusely.Another 50 lashes with a wet noodle. Heaven knows well have a lot available tomorrow (spagetti dinner for my daughters JV Soccer team).Sun, 19 Apr 2009 21:04:42 GMTLynn Pettishttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx[quote][b]Lynn Pettis (4/19/2009)[/b][hr]NOW I SEE IT. Looks like I got the wrong QUOTE >ARRRRRGGGGG!!!!! I apologize, most profusely.50 lashes with a wet noodle![/quote]Now I'm confused :unsure:Perhaps I'll just go run some backups or something, and pop back later./PaulSun, 19 Apr 2009 21:00:49 GMTPaul Whitehttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx[quote][b]Lynn Pettis (4/19/2009)[/b][hr]Too bad you haven't been able to convey anything worthwhile. With the hyperbole and attacks on SQL Server, you aren't going to convince anyone of anything. This is a professional site, try approaching it from that direction.Attacking that which we support only puts us on the defensive, if you haven't notice. Perhaps you should put some thought behind what you are attempting to do. Solid examples of how your "product" can help solve common business problems whould be one thing. Show us real world examples of your "product" actually being used in a real world environment solving these problems.Perhaps a better avenue of approach would be a series of technical articles (minus any attacks on MS SQL Server) would be a start. But as I keep reminding you, MS SQL Server isn't the only SQL based RDBMS marketed today, but I have YET to even see you say ANYTHING negative about ANY of the other SQL based systems. Are they superior to MS SQL Server in some way? If so, I would suggest that you start targeting them for your "product".[/quote]When asked which db he thought was superior C. J. Date replied none because they're all the 'same'. From the perspective of relationaland all sql dbs share the same computer 'science'. A 'table' is the same 'thing' in Sql Server as it is in Oracle and in MySelf. Essentially you're replacing 'features', usually the criteria used to compare dbs, with something that is totally different, if not alien to most sql users. Date has devoted his life to tryingto explain the thing(s) that make for this sql 'sameness'. (I intend to make my attempt at an answer in a considerably shorter time :-)) The relational model can be thought of as what makes for this sameness thing is, the science part of sql, and what it means to supersede it.In Sql:SELECT * FROM Ordersin the RM:SELECT Ordersboth do the same thing and return the same results. Yes the syntax is different and is its own topic of discussion but the two statements represent two fundamentally different points of view, two different sciences. To understand them is to understand the 'features' in each, the what and why of the them. The problem with all this has been that onescience has been presented as 'superior' to the other. I'm trying to walk a thin line by not repeating this point of view and 'offending' sql users while getting at what they are and what they represent. Code alone won't quite get at all this. best,steve[url=http://www.beyondsql.blogspot.com][b]www.beyondsql.blogspot.com[/b][/url]Sun, 19 Apr 2009 20:58:50 GMTsteve dassinhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspxNOW I SEE IT. Looks like I got the wrong QUOTE >ARRRRRGGGGG!!!!! I apologize, most profusely.50 lashes with a wet noodle!Sun, 19 Apr 2009 20:57:32 GMTLynn Pettishttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspxpost edited...??? Missing something, I am?Sun, 19 Apr 2009 20:55:01 GMTLynn Pettishttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx*** post deleted - PW ***Sun, 19 Apr 2009 20:44:31 GMTPaul Whitehttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx[quote][b]Jeff Moden (4/19/2009)[/b][hr]Not necessary is wording fix only... look eye, you must.[/quote]Hmmm, Cardinal Jeff, what else have I missed? My mind is else where at the moment, and I just don't seem to see it. Perchance it is another post in which a correctly spelled word is used in error?I am, at the moment, actually concentrating on another article or three. The research is probably keeping me fir seeing the error.Sun, 19 Apr 2009 20:43:16 GMTLynn Pettishttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspxNot necessary is wording fix only... look eye, you must.Sun, 19 Apr 2009 20:12:34 GMTJeff Modenhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspxPost deleted ... LPSun, 19 Apr 2009 20:01:23 GMTLynn Pettishttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspxJeff,I fixed those links at the same time - same problem.You might need to refresh the page.The links would have worked in CLR :w00t:PaulSun, 19 Apr 2009 19:35:41 GMTPaul Whitehttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx[quote][b]Paul White (4/19/2009)[/b][hr][quote][b]Lynn Pettis (4/19/2009)[/b][hr]With the hyperbola and attacks on SQL Server[/quote]I apologise profusely in advance, but:[url=en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbola]Hyperbola[/url][url=en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole]Hyperbole[/url]My only excuse is that my English teacher was very strict, and it's stuck with me.You hate me don't you? :-DPaul[/quote]No... but I think your computer teacher may:hehe:... those links don't work either. :-P Maybe it was actually a hyperbolic hyperbole?Sun, 19 Apr 2009 19:15:23 GMTJeff Modenhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx[quote][b]Jeff Moden (4/19/2009)[/b][hr]The link doesn't work, Paul.[/quote]Thanks Jeff,Fixed now! Forgot the http:// prefix :blush:Cheers,PaulSun, 19 Apr 2009 19:13:50 GMTPaul Whitehttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx[quote][b]Paul White (4/19/2009)[/b][hr][/quote]The link doesn't work, Paul.Sun, 19 Apr 2009 19:07:11 GMTJeff Modenhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx[quote][b]steve dassin (4/19/2009)[/b][hr]And there's nothing cheap in the ideas I'm trying to convey.[/quote]That's the point I've been trying to make. Some of your ideas are great... the manner in which you try to convey them isn't. Like you said, Res ipse loquitor.Sun, 19 Apr 2009 18:29:50 GMTJeff Modenhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx[quote][b]steve dassin (4/19/2009)[/b][hr]Res ipse loquitor[/quote]*Ahem*[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Res_ipsa_loquitur]Res ispa loquitur[/url]Just to be even-handed... :-DPaulSun, 19 Apr 2009 18:26:35 GMTPaul Whitehttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic689569-263-1.aspx[quote][b]Lynn Pettis (4/19/2009)[/b][hr]With the hyperbola and attacks on SQL Server[/quote]I apologise profusely in advance, but:[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbola]Hyperbola[/url][url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole]Hyperbole[/url]My only excuse is that my English teacher was very strict, and it's stuck with me.You hate me don't you? :-DPauledit: broken linksSun, 19 Apr 2009 18:24:37 GMTPaul White