May 20, 2023 at 3:13 am
As you said, I'm making sure of clarity. 🙂
With that, I'll say that you've just repeated yourself. You're insisting that SQL is a dinosaur here and the its technology is archaic and your comparison to a problem with people on Cobol suggests that you feel that same way about the people that insist SQL would be good for the same thing in Adam Ralph's good 'tube covered.
Have you considered that the futuristic hover car that's being portrayed might actually be the archaic thing? That's a rhetorical question, for sure, because it's obvious that you have not and don't understand how it could be. 😉
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 20, 2023 at 6:12 am
No Jeff Moden I did not state that SQL was a dinosaur at all, I think I basically referred to others doing so with dynotopic languages such as Cobol. I never combined the dynotopic prehistoric concept in regards to SQL and I apologise if that was the take away you got from my statement as that means I did not communicate well what I was trying to state.
Further the key is not that I do not understand (because I absolutely do) but that you did not fully comprehend what I was trying to communicate which again is not your fault as the fault with poor communication falls fully upon the communicator not the communicatee. I hope my statement here helps to clarify the point I was making if not please let me know I will try again.
May 20, 2023 at 7:42 am
No Jeff Moden I did not state that SQL was a dinosaur at all, I think I basically referred to others doing so with dynotopic languages such as Cobol. I never combined the dynotopic concept in regards to SQL and I apologise if that was the take away you got from my statement as that means I did not communicate well what I was trying to state.
Further the key is not that I do not understand (because I absolutely do) but that you did not fully comprehend what I was trying to communicate which again is not your fault as the fault with poor communication falls fully upon the communicator not the communicatee. I hope my statement here helps to clarify the point I was making if not please let me know I will try again.
While Dynotopia is a film and a video game, the word dynotopic does not exist in any dictionary I can find.
May 20, 2023 at 12:45 pm
The link Steve Collins posted is interesting. Got through it, and while I don't quite agree that stored procs create a strangler pattern, I do think in the high concurrency situation he's working, you really do need messaging. This is how Amazon does things. Once in awhile you'll actually find the order you placed isn't in your orders because the messages are bottlenecked somewhere.
It's interesting, and I'm glad I don't have to solve those problems. I especially wouldn't love the business conversation trying to explain a sliding week window vs a calendar window to a business person.
It's interesting to me how the SQL based solution which worked in development suddenly produced errors in production. At that point, at a minimum, he should've made a service call to Microsoft support. Without knowing all the technical details of the exact situation tho it's just speculation. I get what Jeff is saying too, unless I'm ready with an alternative it's not really fair to criticize a solution which works. To my way of thinking future messaging, or undoing transactions a week or month in the future, creates new and bigger headaches more than it solves old ones
Aus dem Paradies, das Cantor uns geschaffen, soll uns niemand vertreiben können
May 20, 2023 at 3:31 pm
Well, Phil Parkin just because a word does not currently exist within any known dictionary does not mean it is not a viable word. In fact, Shakespeare is credited with creating 1700 words and there are many others that created words of their own that later found their way into the official dictionaries. The question is did you understand at least kind of what I was saying (in context) with that non-official word? If yes, then it served its purpose.
Thinking outside the box is part of the reason I can solve problems fairly quickly as I use approaches that are not always predefined.
May 20, 2023 at 5:05 pm
My impression wasn't that the SQL thing caused errors, but that it was a pattern they didn't like for development. I could see potential deadlocks in a high concurrency environment, though I suspect the issues are more that they didn't structure the SQL correctly.
However, like you, I'm loathe to criticize too much since I didn't see the system, errors, or effects.
May 21, 2023 at 1:06 am
No Jeff Moden I did not state that SQL was a dinosaur at all, I think I basically referred to others doing so with dynotopic languages such as Cobol. I never combined the dynotopic concept in regards to SQL and I apologise if that was the take away you got from my statement as that means I did not communicate well what I was trying to state.
Further the key is not that I do not understand (because I absolutely do) but that you did not fully comprehend what I was trying to communicate which again is not your fault as the fault with poor communication falls fully upon the communicator not the communicatee. I hope my statement here helps to clarify the point I was making if not please let me know I will try again.
So tell me that this sarcastic remark has nothing to do with SQL, which was the subject at hand. And then tell me what your were referring to as a "dinosaur" when you said "build a better dinosaur".
Yes, why would anyone want to use that complicated futuristic hover car when we can spend 10 times the amount of resources to build a better dinosaur. I mean, then we will still have the dinosaur and its simplicity. Yeah it is a bit slower by maybe uh a meer 75% and it has a lot of waste by product where the hover car has no emissions but hey its still a better solution because its the dinosaur we know.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 21, 2023 at 3:10 am
Okay if I understood your last post I will say -- (1) I do not make sarcastic comments without including an 😉 to let you know I am not being serious.
Again if it helps (without looking back), perhaps I did shift gears a bit and yes I was not saying that SQL was a dynotopic langugage at any point in time -- in fact the only language I was referring to as dynotopic prehistoric was COBOL. I hope that clarifies things for you and puts us on the same page going forward.
May 21, 2023 at 8:33 am
Well, Phil Parkin just because a word does not currently exist within any known dictionary does not mean it is not a viable word. In fact, Shakespeare is credited with creating 1700 words and there are many others that created words of their own that later found their way into the official dictionaries. The question is did you understand at least kind of what I was saying (in context) with that non-official word? If yes, then it served its purpose.
Thinking outside the box is part of the reason I can solve problems fairly quickly as I use approaches that are not always predefined.
I was simply pointing out that the word does not exist. If Shakespeare were writing in a technical IT forum, I suspect he'd stick to known terms, to ensure he got his point over succinctly. He'd save his more flowery prose for plays and sonnets.
May 21, 2023 at 1:29 pm
Thinking outside the box is part of the reason I can solve problems fairly quickly as I use approaches that are not always predefined.
Thinking inside rectangles is how I solve problems. The first table in the FROM clause forms the initial state of the rectangle. If the table has many rows the skinny part of the rectangle is side-to-side. If there's only 1 row then the rectangle is turned 90 degrees. If there's computation for which the output is repeatedly referenced, then CROSS APPLY can extend the rectangle to the right (and downward (and upward) too if there's row expansion/(-) within CROSS APPLY). Each additional element of the FROM clause adds or subtracts (downward (or upward) and/or to the right) to the rectangle as necessary. There's always a final rectangle which fits or else there wouldn't be a problem 🙂
Aus dem Paradies, das Cantor uns geschaffen, soll uns niemand vertreiben können
May 21, 2023 at 1:43 pm
additional JOIN's and CROSS APPLY's apply to the rectangle defined immediately above it (in order of appearance) within the FROM clause
Aus dem Paradies, das Cantor uns geschaffen, soll uns niemand vertreiben können
May 21, 2023 at 6:12 pm
Okay if I understood your last post I will say -- (1) I do not make sarcastic comments without including an 😉 to let you know I am not being serious.
Again if it helps (without looking back), perhaps I did shift gears a bit and yes I was not saying that SQL was a dynotopic langugage at any point in time -- in fact the only language I was referring to as dynotopic was COBOL. I hope that clarifies things for you and puts us on the same page going forward.
Fair enough. be advised that it sounded like you were blasting SQL and be advised that it sounded like you were using your COBOL example to reinforce that.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 21, 2023 at 7:02 pm
Dennis Jensen wrote:Well, Phil Parkin just because a word does not currently exist within any known dictionary does not mean it is not a viable word. In fact, Shakespeare is credited with creating 1700 words and there are many others that created words of their own that later found their way into the official dictionaries. The question is did you understand at least kind of what I was saying (in context) with that non-official word? If yes, then it served its purpose.
Thinking outside the box is part of the reason I can solve problems fairly quickly as I use approaches that are not always predefined.
I was simply pointing out that the word does not exist. If Shakespeare were writing in a technical IT forum, I suspect he'd stick to known terms, to ensure he got his point over succinctly. He'd save his more flowery prose for plays and sonnets.
To me dynotopic would mean a focus on powerful or forceful discussions, ideas, or areas of interest.
The prefix "dyna-" is derived from the Greek word "dýnamis," meaning power or force, often associated with dynamics or energy, for example a dynamometer or "dyno" for short is something that measures torque or RPM of engines. The term "topic" typically refers to a subject or theme of discussion.
May 21, 2023 at 10:59 pm
Okay fair enough and thanks Johnathan AC Roberts that explains dissecting the single word all by itself -- but then I did use a caveat it by saying "within context". So are you saying that you would interpret dynotopic within the context of how it was being used to mean "powerful theme"? I would find that odd. However, since some seem to being having so much trouble with that word -- I went back and editted for you all.
May 21, 2023 at 11:39 pm
Fair enough. be advised that it sounded like you were blasting SQL and be advised that it sounded like you were using your COBOL example to reinforce that.
Okay also fair enough, so I went back and made that clear by adding (aka T-SQL in this case) after mentioning the futuristic hover car. Basically, stating the T-SQL is the futuristic hover car in this case. I hope that resolves that issue.
Nice Steve Collins that you limit yourself to only working within a box 😉 and while I am assuming you are being verbosely sarcastic I will point out the following in case you were not aware:
Originally, the box was a reference to the nine-dot problem. The goal of this classic puzzle is simple; Connect all the dots in a 9-dot (3 x 3) array using no more than four straight lines and without lifting your pen or pencil from the page. To solve the puzzle, one must let go of the assumption that the lines must be drawn within the boundaries of the dots which can be viewed as a square or a box. Thus to solve this puzzle one must think outside the box.
In a figurative sense, the "box" is a metaphor for an unnecessary assumptions, constraints, or precedents which limit creative problem-solving. Like a literal box, an inflexible representation is restrictive and confining. To overcome this impasse to creative problem solving, it may help to change perspectives, question rules (or assumptions), and try different approaches. In other words, "think outside the box."
Thus your statement seems to say that you only think in very restrictive and confined ways that will neatly fit within your limited box which happens to be rectangular in shape but a static box none-the-less. However, I am going to guess that was not your intention.
Viewing 15 posts - 66,316 through 66,330 (of 66,816 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply