[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [xml-dev] XML Database Decision Tree?
- From: "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
- To: "'firstname.lastname@example.org'" <email@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:40:58 -0400
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ronald Bourret [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 4:03 PM
> To: 'email@example.com'
> Subject: Re: [xml-dev] XML Database Decision Tree?
> I quoted the same (very impressive) statistics at a database user's
> group meeting last week and somebody pointed out that one possible
> reason for hierarchical databases still existing is not that they're
> better at the problem they solve, just that it's not cost
> effective (or perhaps even possible) to change all the
> code that's based on them.
Hmmm. One would think that with all the Y2K remediation, people would have
replaced their hierarchical DBMS with DB2 or Oracle while they were in there
re-writing the applications. I seem to recall Mr. Ellison pointing out this
possibility on one or two (hundred?) occasions in the 1990's, anyway. I'm
sure that this did happen often enough, but not in the situations where IMS
or Adabas simply did the specific job much better than the alternatives.
<marketing hat="on">Also, if the "it's the old code, not the DBMS"
hypothesis were true, one would expect a gradual decline in the
"pre-relational" DBMS systems over time as the old code died for one reason
or another. This is difficult to reconcile with fact that
Adabas®/Natural(tm) revenue is up 49% so far this year.
At some point it would make more sense to re-write the code than keep paying
for non-relational DBMS license upgrades, no?