Re: Relationals vs. Objects Databases I

> Jeremy Rickard wrote in message ...
> >>No. All OO programming languages are computationally complete
> >>(only requires arrays, if and goto (loops)). OO centainly 'fits' the
 way
> >>people think about problems.
> >
> >In practice, SQL seems complete enough in my experience.

Not in mine. I have an application with a simple constraint: x1+x2=x3. But this is repeated many times over recursively, i.e., x3+x4=x5, x5+x6=x7, et al.
SQL cannot handle this. I have to know a priori how many levels of recursion I need
(and I cannot). Even if I did know how many levels I need, I would have to do a recursive
SQL that many times even for the cases which only go one level deep. So I am forced
to handle the constraints in the programming language. Now that I am forced to program
in something besides SQL, why should I have to tolerate the impedance mismatch that adds
30-50% to my work effort?

Note: This is a real-world example. I am trying to model the mass flowrates of a chemical
as it flows through a network of piping in a chemical plant. SQL dies on one of the most simple
applications I have. Received on Tue Feb 03 1998 - 00:00:00 CST