smarlowe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Scott Marlowe) writes: > To me, the real argument is, "Is SQL so lacking that it should be > replaced". In what REAL measurable ways is SQL lacking so badly we > should toss it and start over? It's not perfect, that's for sure. > But what's the investment on starting over, and the possible > traction of a non-SQL database in a largely SQL driven market? The only visible alternative, at this point, is Tutorial D, and it doesn't particularly excite me... -- "cbbrowne","@","ntlug.org" http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/languages.html A mathematician is a machine for converting caffeine into theorems.
