<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">
<br><div><div>On Jan 3, 2007, at 13:01 , J J wrote:</div>[I wrote]<br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div><blockquote type="cite"><p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px"><font face="Helvetica" size="3" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica">You are kidding, right?</font></p> </blockquote><p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Helvetica; min-height: 14.0px"><br></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><font face="Helvetica" size="3" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica">Who are you people getting for DBA's? :)</font></p> </div></blockquote><br></div><div>Let's pull back some context here:</div><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div><div><blockquote type="cite"><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; "><blockquote type="cite">Are you serious with this (data too large to fit into memory)? And if you use a good RDBMS then you don't have to worry about disk speed or distribution.</blockquote></div></blockquote></div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div>Do you really, truly believe you don't have to worry about physical parameters such as disk speed just because there is an intermediate layer between you and your disk(s) called a RDBMS?<br><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div>Then our vendor must have been really ignorant when they recommended that we get faster machines with faster disks in order to fix problems we were having where the database could not keep up with the (write) data rate. And reality must also have not known about this magical property of RDBMS to make you immune to physical limtations, because getting faster disks *did* actually solve the problem.</div><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div>Or are you saying that what happens is that you pay someone else to worry about those parameters?</div><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div>Of course, using a database in that scenario was actually not necessary, and the benefits that the vendor touted for their database-based system were quite irrelevant in our application context. We could have built a far (a) faster (b) simpler (c) more reliable and (d) cheaper system had we not bought into the "must use RDBMS because it makes everything better" voodoo and just kept the relevant data in application memory. This might have been a small amount of extra programming initially, but would it ever have paid off in maintenance.</div><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div>Especially since we didn't actually own the data, we were just getting a feed from somewhere else.</div><div><br></div><div>Had the data been ours, that would have been a different story, because data-integrity is one RDBMS myth that I still believe in, as it hasn't been beaten out of me yet by encounters with reality...</div><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div>Marcel</div><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div></body></html>