Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.csd.uwm.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!indri!polyslo!csun!csusac!unify!dgh
From: dgh@unify.UUCP (David Harrington)
Newsgroups: comp.databases
Subject: Re: Extended RDB vs OODB
Message-ID: <1052@unify.UUCP>
Date: 23 Aug 89 01:22:05 GMT
References: <3560052@wdl1.UUCP> <408@odi.ODI.COM> <3324@rtech.rtech.com> <1037@unify.UUCP> <1989Aug18.135935.29299@odi.com>
Reply-To: dgh@unify.UUCP (David Harrington)
Organization: Unify Corporation, Sacramento, CA, USA
Lines: 49

In article <1989Aug18.135935.29299@odi.com> dlw@odi.com writes:
>In article <1037@unify.UUCP> dgh@unify.UUCP (David Harrington) writes:
>
>   I agree.  Look at the OODBMS companies like Ontologic.  They are either living
>   off an existing RDBMS which they are trying to re-cast as OO, or they are
>   dying.
>
>This is hardly a convincing argument.  Yes, Ontologic and Servio-Logic
>might be having problems or not growing as fast as they might, but
>it's not logical to leap to the conclusion that OODBMS technology
>isn't going to happen, or is only going to happen as a series of
>changes to existing RDBMS implementations. 

I didn't intend to make that point; indeed, I do believe that OODBMS
technology IS going to happen.  It was my understanding while I was at Servio
(yes, I'll admit to having a personal opinion about that company) that
Ontologic was grafting an OO layer onto their existing technology.  This, of
course, was seen by Servio as the wrong approach.  Subsequent events such as
the Index Technology deal (which I knew of) seem to tell me that the Ontologic
efforts are meeting some success.  I wish them well.

>There are many other
>factors that have shaped the courses of those two companies.  Merely
>because A is true and B is true does not mean that A caused B.  (It
>would be improper and highly rude of me to speculate about what those
>other factors are, but I can suggest that one has to do with the use
>of proprietary or unusual computer languages.  It's also possible (as
>you suggested) that they started a bit too early.)  

I was also suggesting that Servio has a fundamental problem with top
management, which is not qualified to run a technology company, much less
a leading edge technology company. (There is more than just opinion in this
statement; I'll be happy to share more info. over email).

The staff and managers at
Servio's GemStone group are fine people; too bad they won't ever get to
realize the fruits of their considerable labor in the market place.  (Example:
the CEO once said he wanted GS to be a "dBase killer" -- somewhat unclear on the
concept, I would suggest).

>
>Usual notice: I work for a start-up company producing an OODBMS.  In
>case anyone on this list doesn't recognize the name "Unify", Mr.
>Harrington works for a company that produces a relational DBMS and
>associated products.
>

Indeed, I do not speak against OODBMS either for myself or for Unify.  Anybody
in this business would be foolish to ignore this technology.