Posted by raylopez99 on 07/15/07 16:54

On Jul 15, 9:17 am, Erland Sommarskog <esq...@sommarskog.se> wrote:

[stuff deleted]

Thanks Erland for critiquing SQL Menace's book "Pro SQL Server 2005
Database Design and Optimization ", which I will order from the three
he recommended.

As for CAM/Pointers architecture versus RDBMS architecture, I'm sure
some smart engineer could figure out how to make the former work.
They already use CAM architecture for routing internet packets, so I'm
sure they can figure out a way to do double entry accounting (that is,
update cash-holdings account when debiting withdraw, etc).

Rest of your points are well taken. It probably does take a lot of
time to search a 30 GB RAM memory, even with a quad core Intel uP.
Perhaps RDBMS will always be faster for real-time transactions, which
seems to be where they are used.

As for data entry, I was simply saying with RDBMS it seems you have to
expend effort in getting the right data into the right field (i.e.,
cannot enter a Char into a date field, etc). So some "energy" has to
be expended to do this, moreso than a flat file, which can be more
free-flowing. But, as the Second Law of Thermo (entropy) says, you
cannot get "high value" without expending energy (no pain, no gain).
So I suppose employing cheap Indian or Chinese or Swedish housewives
to do "data entry" is a small price to pay in order to get data in the
right format so you can use it efficiently. The difference, if you
follow my analogy, between a rules based expert system and a more free
flowing "Knowledge Inference engine" that uses keywords.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inference_engine. Rules based engines
are easier to build, and they seem to run faster it seems to me.

RDBMS are more like rigid "rules based" expert systems while "my" (not
really mine, it's old) proposal is more like a free-flowing inference
engine. Like another poster in this thread says, for scientific work
where you don't really know what the associations are between the data
(so you don't know what datum is orthogonal to another; and what a
good key is, etc) then "my" proposal makes more sense.

Anyway, thanks for replying and I hope to catch you again later, since
I'll have more questions that you can answer if you have the time.
Right now, I just ran my first stored procedure successfully
"manually", that is, from inside of VS2005 but without using C#/C++ as
the "glue"; I entered the parameters I wanted into the query, and it
worked (I was entering a new row in my Authors dB--which also gave
rise to a new question, kind of trivial, but why the new row is
automatically numbered with a successive number that does not repeat
even when you delete the new row later and run the query again... must
have something to do with a "seed" of some sort.. that is, after the
"3rd" row is entered, and I manually delete the row, the next time I
run the query the new row is not "3" but 4. And if I delete again,
the next time the new row is 5, not "3". And again, the autonumber
becomes 6, not "3", etc. Not a big deal but I'm curious as to
why...must be some parameter that's akin to "consecutive renumbering"
for new rows). I felt like successfully running "Hello World" in
programming! Also, I installed the MSFT "AdventureWorks dB" sample
(the successor to "NorthWind dB" sample in SQL 2000). If anybody
knows of a series of lessons using this "AdventureWorks" dB (my book
by Morrison says they occasionally will refer to it, but I was
thinking more like a dedicated series of lessons using this dB) let me
know (i'll also Google this later, but if these lessons are readily
available on the Net feel free to reply here).

Cheers

RL

[Back to original message]