Re: Here we go again...
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2006
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 66693
interpreted = N
texte = Thanks Kenneth. Thanks for clarifying the myth. I think it is important for developers to understand the facts. WebDNA = is not "relational" database. By database definition, you must meet = certain criteria to call something "relational" database. MS Access is not a true database because it didn't meet all the = criteria. Bess -----Original Message----- From: WebDNA Talk [mailto:WebDNA-Talk@talk.smithmicro.com]On Behalf Of Kenneth Grome Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 7:12 PM To: WebDNA Talk Subject: Re: Here we go again... On Sat, 1 Apr 2006 08:42:44 -0600, Pat McCormick wrote: > Actually WebDNA doesn't use a flat file. That is the case for the=20 > older Typhoon version, but WebDNA, simply because it can have=20 > multiple databases open, is no longer a flat file system. This is ridiculous. Webdna has always been a flat file database system = just like Bess said. It can open multiple flat file databases at a time = -- but so what? That does NOT make it a relational system by any means! > The purpose for products like Oracle, SQL and other "databases" is to=20 > encrypt your text so that you need to buy their products to see your=20 > text. This is another bad assumption. MySQL for example doesn't encrypt any = data, all its data is right there in files that can be edited by a text = editor. And MySQL certainly falls into the "SQL" category you = mentioned, right? I really don't mind people being "in love" with webdna and bragging = about it, but at the same time I think you should not make statements = that are your personal assumptions when they are sometimes far from the = truth. Webdna is clearly not the best solution for web sites that = benefit from relational systems, especially where large data sets are = involved. I have proven this on several occasions and so have others = I'm sure. Sincerely,=20 Kenneth Grome=20 owner@kengrome.com kengrome@gmail.com www.kengrome.com ------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list
. To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to = Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
Thanks Kenneth. Thanks for clarifying the myth. I think it is important for developers to understand the facts. WebDNA = is not "relational" database. By database definition, you must meet = certain criteria to call something "relational" database. MS Access is not a true database because it didn't meet all the = criteria. Bess -----Original Message----- From: WebDNA Talk [mailto:WebDNA-Talk@talk.smithmicro.com]On Behalf Of Kenneth Grome Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 7:12 PM To: WebDNA Talk Subject: Re: Here we go again... On Sat, 1 Apr 2006 08:42:44 -0600, Pat McCormick wrote: > Actually WebDNA doesn't use a flat file. That is the case for the=20 > older Typhoon version, but WebDNA, simply because it can have=20 > multiple databases open, is no longer a flat file system. This is ridiculous. Webdna has always been a flat file database system = just like Bess said. It can open multiple flat file databases at a time = -- but so what? That does NOT make it a relational system by any means! > The purpose for products like Oracle, SQL and other "databases" is to=20 > encrypt your text so that you need to buy their products to see your=20 > text. This is another bad assumption. MySQL for example doesn't encrypt any = data, all its data is right there in files that can be edited by a text = editor. And MySQL certainly falls into the "SQL" category you = mentioned, right? I really don't mind people being "in love" with webdna and bragging = about it, but at the same time I think you should not make statements = that are your personal assumptions when they are sometimes far from the = truth. Webdna is clearly not the best solution for web sites that = benefit from relational systems, especially where large data sets are = involved. I have proven this on several occasions and so have others = I'm sure. Sincerely,=20 Kenneth Grome=20 owner@kengrome.com kengrome@gmail.com www.kengrome.com ------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to = Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/
"Bess Ho"
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
problems with 2 tags (1997)
I give up!! (1997)
(1997)
Updating checkboxes made easy !!! (1998)
Tech question about web dna actions (1998)
Error -108 (1997)
Search bug. Help (2002)
Missing custom convert.db (1998)
Nav. 4 probs with cart (1997)
[WebDNA] Searching Possible Bug (2009)
[WebDNA] problems with [protect] on new OSX lion install (2012)
database size? (1997)
payflowpro problem #2 (2003)
Re:Item options w/ price adjustment (1997)
OT - How to pay commissions to non US affiliates? (2000)
[WebDNA] Admin Login Required to Serve any TPL Page (2009)
Bug Report, maybe (1997)
Latest beta slow on [order] and [purchase] (1997)
the dreaded unitShipCost (2003)
Using Plug-In while running 1.6.1 (1997)