Subject | Re: The Commoditization of SQL |
---|---|
Author | paulruizendaal |
Post date | 2004-02-13T09:46:21Z |
--- In Firebird-Architect@yahoogroups.com, Phil Shrimpton <phil@s...>
wrote:
In my warped view of DB design, an rdbms is simply a source code
compiler bolted on top of a virtual machine executor, bolted on top
of a storage engine (which by itself is a few layers).
In a well designed system, moving from SQL to XQuery simply means
bolting a new compiler onto the same base. In the past, Firebird
moved from GDML to SQL without much trouble.
I'm sure it can make the move to XQuery - if ever needed - without
much fuss, other than Ann having a fit: the move from GDML to SQL was
a shift from the expressive and elegant to the bulky and unwieldy and
XQuery sounds like (bulky+unwieldy) squared. :^)
Paul
wrote:
> Hi,Phil,
>
> Only 5 years left for SQL, according to this man....
>
> http://otn.oracle.com/pub/columns/melton_sql.html
>
> ...and XQuery is the future.
>
> ..not sure myself
>
> Phil
In my warped view of DB design, an rdbms is simply a source code
compiler bolted on top of a virtual machine executor, bolted on top
of a storage engine (which by itself is a few layers).
In a well designed system, moving from SQL to XQuery simply means
bolting a new compiler onto the same base. In the past, Firebird
moved from GDML to SQL without much trouble.
I'm sure it can make the move to XQuery - if ever needed - without
much fuss, other than Ann having a fit: the move from GDML to SQL was
a shift from the expressive and elegant to the bulky and unwieldy and
XQuery sounds like (bulky+unwieldy) squared. :^)
Paul