I have long been coming to the conclusion that relational databases are more trouble than they're worth. There are certain domains where they are absolutely necessary, but people use them in lots of circumstances where they don't fit the problem.

Ruby on Rails being a prime example.

I have long been coming to the conclusion that relational databases are more trouble than they're worth.

Dem's fightin' words!

Ok, not really.

I don't know much about Ruby on Rails, so I googled. So I guess it requires a relational database? Huh.

Tom, you gotta say more than that. Give us some examples of where you think that relational databases are accepted, but you think they're overkill.

Give us some examples of where you think that relational databases are accepted, but you think they're overkill.

Yeah, I'm curious too. Almost everything I do involves accounting software for big construction companies, which is a quintessential example of where relational databases are required....

The thing is, relational databases are expensive. Relational algebra is computationally expensive. ACID transactions are computationally expensive. Backing up databases is expensive. Replicating databases is expensive. If you don't have to use those things, why pay for them? And a database server adds a critical component that will cause your whole system to fail if it goes down.

Meanwhile, writing your data directly to the filesystem, is cheap, easy, and OS developers have spent decades optimizing their performance. Backing up and replicating filesystems is a well-understood problem. And judicious use of atomic renames can give you 80% of what ACID gives you.

Do you think that the need for ACID transactions is overstated, then? I have to cop to being a whore for normalisation, so I'm going to have to ask a whole lot of questions.

Kick start my imagination. The textbook first app for relational databases is often an invoice, so that the fledgling programmer can get the sense of the relations between customers, invoices, and invoice headers and detail lines. Would you suggest the development of the data model (many to one relationships, et al) be done differently on paper too? Or is it just how you translate that into the digital realm?

You know what my three table structure looks like--tell me about your filesystem.

Hey Drew, when you eventually wake up and poke your head in here, I have a question for you (or omnis, or anyone else who pokes their head in here and can offer an informed opinion):

I was looking around for tips on trying to get Pro Tools running on Leopard. So far, I have had no luck finding info on how to get it running. And in fact, a lot of people (who aren't just waiting on Digidesign to release an update) were talking about just switching to Logic.

So, aside from the fact that I already possess a copy of ProTools and Logic Studio is $500, is there some other reason I should use ProTools instead of Logic Studio for a sound editing suite?

In my opinion ProTools has a much more streamlined workflow. There's a reason pretty much every professional studio uses ProTools.

In my opinion ProTools has a much more streamlined workflow. There's a reason pretty much every professional studio uses ProTools.

Good enough reason to not spend $500. I was just wondering.

I mentioned here previously about the utter uselessness of Home Depot's web site search function.

A search for the words "fire extinguisher" returns three items, none of which are fire extinguishers.

I know they sell fire extinguishers. I bought the two we have in the house there.