October 22, 2009 at 7:40 am
Two cups of coffee and feeling philosopical...
When I was a boy, and computers were carved from wood and cranked by hand, it was widely understood that hierarchical databases outperformed relational databases for transaction processing. Yet somehow relational became the standard.... ever wonder why?
I have my own thoughts on the matter but I'd be interesting in getting insights from the rest of you.
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
October 22, 2009 at 7:53 am
I don't think this is the point, Bob.
What I don't find appropriate is storing non-relational data in a relational database and expecting this to behave and perform as if it was relational.
There's a tool for every purpose but, once you have chosen the tool, go and use it with its own rules.
My € 0.02 anyway...
-- Gianluca Sartori
October 22, 2009 at 7:56 am
Bob Hovious 24601 (10/22/2009)
Two cups of coffee and feeling philosopical...When I was a boy, and computers were carved from wood and cranked by hand, it was widely understood that hierarchical databases outperformed relational databases for transaction processing. Yet somehow relational became the standard.... ever wonder why?
I have my own thoughts on the matter but I'd be interesting in getting insights from the rest of you.
I'm guessing that the fact not not all data is hierarchical has something to do with it.
For best practices on asking questions, please read the following article: Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help[/url]
October 22, 2009 at 8:01 am
Bob Hovious 24601 (10/22/2009)
Two cups of coffee and feeling philosopical...When I was a boy, and computers were carved from wood and cranked by hand, it was widely understood that hierarchical databases outperformed relational databases for transaction processing. Yet somehow relational became the standard.... ever wonder why?
I have my own thoughts on the matter but I'd be interesting in getting insights from the rest of you.
Not sure what a hierachical database is :blush:
CODASYL network models were the first databases I worked with 😀
And if you really want to get nostalgic, the first computer I worked on was an Elliott 803 :crazy:
Far away is close at hand in the images of elsewhere.
Anon.
October 22, 2009 at 8:12 am
Bob Hovious 24601 (10/22/2009)
Two cups of coffee and feeling philosopical...When I was a boy, and computers were carved from wood and cranked by hand, it was widely understood that hierarchical databases outperformed relational databases for transaction processing. Yet somehow relational became the standard.... ever wonder why?
I have my own thoughts on the matter but I'd be interesting in getting insights from the rest of you.
Hierarchical databases do transactions faster, but they generally are totally hopeless at data mining and reporting.
When hardware was slower, it made a bigger difference. Now that relational databases can handle "enough" transactions per second, their advantages in all other aspects of database function make them a better choice for most situations.
If you want a good look at a hierarchical database with top-notch performance, check out Intersystem's Cache. It's a MUMPS system that stores data in multidimensional hierarchical arrays. It's very, very fast. But it's also a major pain to work with. Every dev who's ever used it, so far as I can tell, hates it with a passion. I've tried it out, and building a simple name and address system took over an hour. Same data, SQL Server, took under 5 minutes. The Cache database, once it was built, was blazing fast. I've seen benchmarks where data loads into Oracle databases took days to complete, and the same data into Cache took a few hours. Independent testing, not their own labs. But the same databases also took a couple of months to design, build and test in Oracle, and took over a year in Cache.
And that's one of the most successful hierarchical databases around.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
October 22, 2009 at 9:16 am
I think part of the reason that relational dbs, and not object or hierarchial or column dbs rule is the they have a low barrier to entry and they are relatively to understand.
the idea of storing data as a spreadsheet, which is what a table is, is easy to understand. However as we normalize, it becomes harder to conceptualize what is happening for many people. That's why we get bad design, because it's simpler.
I'm not sure if would be better/worse with other types of dbs. I do think that it might make sense to have different types of databases for different apps, i.e. columnar for data warehousing, but we need better tools and training about how to map things from one structure to the other.
October 22, 2009 at 9:51 am
If it's true that hierarchical model is somehow nearer to OO design, this doesn't mean we would have better design. I often see bad design in Object Oriented languages. Probably it's easier to see design flaws in OO design rather than in relational design. At least it's what I see around.
-- Gianluca Sartori
October 22, 2009 at 4:17 pm
Hi,
sorry, but I'm about to leave an OP hanging... am trying to get packed to go on holiday, and started into a avg/aggregate/median problem I haven't got a mission of getting sorted.
mbs someone could help
plz
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic807331-8-1.aspx#bm807476
k thnks bye
October 22, 2009 at 4:27 pm
Allister Reid (10/22/2009)
Hi,sorry, but I'm about to leave an OP hanging... am trying to get packed to go on holiday, and started into a avg/aggregate/median problem I haven't got a mission of getting sorted.
mbs someone could help
plz
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic807331-8-1.aspx#bm807476
k thnks bye
Saw that one too, but decided to leave it. Just wondering what the OP means with median in the first place.
Anyhow Allister, enjoy your leave!
October 22, 2009 at 4:48 pm
Actually, I think in OODBMS or HDBMS, we'd get worse design. Harder to understand. My point is that RDBMS is the easiest (relative) of the 3. Not sure where column DBMS comes in.
October 22, 2009 at 10:16 pm
Steve Jones - Editor (10/22/2009)
Actually, I think in OODBMS or HDBMS, we'd get worse design. Harder to understand. My point is that RDBMS is the easiest (relative) of the 3. Not sure where column DBMS comes in.
BWAA-HAAA!!!! And likely as not, some folks would STILL write Cursors and Loops even in an OODBMS. :-P:-P:-P:hehe:
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 23, 2009 at 3:15 pm
Sorry to change the current subject but...
Keeping with the title of this chain - Are the posted questions getting worse? My question is... Are the posted replies in all the forums taking a slight turn towards the dark side?
I may just be me, but I have noticed that posts have (ever so slightly) taken a slight turn. This may be due to the economy, the silliness if some of the questions, or it is getting close to Halloween. I am not really sure. Does anyone else notice this slight trend?
Joe 😎
October 23, 2009 at 3:43 pm
After well nigh unto 9,000 posts, The Thread has taken many turns. The other forums do the same things. Don't sweat it, the pendulum will swing the other way soon.
Then again, there are at least two times a year that questions start coming in for homework assignments and exams. That might have something to do with it.
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
October 23, 2009 at 3:45 pm
It's probably just a minor fluctuation in the Force.
For best practices on asking questions, please read the following article: Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help[/url]
October 23, 2009 at 3:51 pm
So true, Alvin. 🙂
By the way, thanks for everyone's insights. I always thought that relational was the db model of choice because of flexibility and because it was the easiest for producing information. It was like pulling teeth to try to look at information in a hierarchical system in new way. If it hadn't been designed anticipating certain views of the data, you almost couldn't get there from here.
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
Viewing 15 posts - 8,746 through 8,760 (of 66,547 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply