[Linux-users] Data Base Opinion

[Rick Sivernell]

On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 14:42:45 -0700
Bill Campbell <linux-sxs at celestial.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 20, 2007, Rick Sivernell wrote:
> >all
> >
> >
> >I am in the planning stage of a new commercial product. It will be cross platform,
> >Unix Linux and M$ludge. M$ludge creates the best money though.
> >
> 
> >The product is a Contact Manager program. I will need to use a standard db,
> >with the ability to allow Oracle SQL Server, if they wish to waste money,
> >or some other db. For my default db I have thought about Postgress, or
> >something like sleepycat. What would others think about these or any other
> >db types. It would be nice to have a sql statement to load, read or
> >manipulate data. No flames,good reasoning please. I will be using the
> >wxWidgets for C++.
> 
> I would go with postgresql for anything serious.  It's very robust, ACID
> compliant, sticks very close to SQL standards, and there are many tools
> available to access it via python, perl, php, Zope, C, C++, etc.
> 
> The Sleepycat/Berkeley (BDB) code os probably the nastiest I've ever had
> opportunity to look at.  They seem to have no qualms about changing the
> low-level API, not only amongst major release levels, but even between
> minor releases.  If you want to get a feel for this, look at the Berkeley
> code for python or perl for examples if #ifn*def hell.


   This does not surprise me. About 12 years ago I worked for a company the manager
insisted upon this particular db, we paid over $6,000.00 for it. It looked and worked 
like crap. Complete with #ifn*def crapola. I forgot the name though.

> 
> Unfortunately Linux vendors tend to tie the BDB code into their
> distributions at a very low level (Caldera had it in libc at one point),
> and updating can be rather ``interesting''.


> 
> Bill
> --


-- 
 Rick Sivernell
 Dallas, Texas  75287
 972 306-2296
 res005ru at verizon.net
 Registered Linux User