From: Ned Konz <ned@...>
Date: 2001-12-13T11:26:31+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:28379] Re: DBI and large result sets

On Wednesday 12 December 2001 05:05 pm, Todd Gillespie wrote:

> Marketers would call this 'lying by repeated assertion' until no one
> notices the lie anymore.  Sort of how Microsoft provides 'security'.
> MySQL is a fine example of ways a good OSS project should *not* be run.
> I'm glad the Ruby community is totally open with its shortcomings and
> plans for the future.

But they also support transactions. If you don't like their 'atomic 
operations', you don't have to use them; you can use the transactions that 
their InnoDB tables provide. What's the problem?

Notes:
* I have made a point of staying as far away from databases as possible over 
the last 20 years, because I find business applications boring.
* I just started using BerkeleyDB for some simple persistency in a data 
acquisition system a few months ago, and it has done what I've needed it to 
do. I'm not joining tables.
* I've never used a SQL database, so I don't know too much about them; I 
could be missing something important.

-- 
Ned Konz
currently: Stanwood, WA
email:     ned@bike-nomad.com
homepage:  http://bike-nomad.com