Re: Myth of the database independent applications (Was: Are you using PL/SQL)

On May 24, 4:18 pm, Serge Rielau <srie..._at_ca.ibm.com> wrote:
> The market drives standardization.
> If vendors of do not agree on standards then the market abandons the
> fractured interface. That is exactly what is happening.
> One reason why apps are written in Java and abuse DBMS as mere file
> systems is that vendors have not been able to keep SQL standardized.
> This is not the first time this happens and it won't be the last.
>
> The very fact that deep exploitation of the DBMS is preached as a
> "requirement" drives the app vendors away.
> Why would an app vendor want to be held hostage by any specific database
> vendor just to get a performance improvement that Moore's law will fix
> for them in short time anyway?
> Why would customers put themselves into a position where the vendor can
> dictate the support price upon next renewal because the customers cannot
> threaten to change the supplier and the vendor knows that all to well.
>
> The premise of SQL was and is that it's the DBMS' job to optimize. It is
> not the app developers job to write e.g. EXIST instead of IN to achieve
> performance.
>
> If vendors cannot agree on a procedural language then the customers
> cannot be blamed for refusing or at least minimizing its usage.
>
> Cheers
> Serge
> --
> Serge Rielau
> DB2 Solutions Development
> IBM Toronto Lab

The truth is that databases don't like direct sql very much. I don't think deep db exploration is the key, but rather a solid understanding of systems and performance models. Specific implementation would benefit greatly if those implementing would stop and add performance as a step in their project plan.

There are good and bad ways to do everything. If every database were vanilla, what would the selling point be? I think a good deal of assumptions and misunderstanding drive the market and standardization is a misnomer for assumption. Received on Thu May 24 2007 - 16:05:10 CDT