Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!tank!ncar!unmvax!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!mtxinu!sybase!phobos!forrest From: forrest@phobos.sybase.com (Jon Forrest) Newsgroups: comp.databases Subject: Re: DB engine embedded in the OS? (long) Message-ID: <5743@sybase.sybase.com> Date: 25 Aug 89 05:17:00 GMT References: <8951@blia.BLI.COM> <671@cullsj.UUCP> Sender: news@sybase.sybase.com Reply-To: forrest@sybase.com Distribution: comp Organization: Sybase, Inc. Lines: 27 I worked at Britton Lee for two years and now I work for Sybase. I think the Britton Lee approach is doomed because of the cost and the time it takes to develop hardware. When I started at Britton Lee in 1986 work was already underway on what I believe is called the Sharebase 8000 (it had the codename "Omega".) At the time, if its design goals had been met, it would have been faster that anything else available at a similiar cost. But, it took so long to develop the hardware, and the hardware specific software, that it's just now shipping in any quantity (correct me miket if I'm wrong). Meanwhile, you can buy off the shelf hardware that, when running Sybase software, will, if I'm not mistaken, out perform the 8000 (I don't have any specific proof, this is conjecture) at a cost no greater than the 8000. This isn't due to any failing on the part of Britton Lee. The people there are some of the smartest (and nicest) people I'll ever have the honor of working with. But, there's no way a small company like Britton Lee can keep up hardware wise with the MIPS and SPARCS of the world. This is where I see the fundemental difference between Britton Lee and the rest of us that do client/server database systems. Whether or not the db engine is embeded in the OS (which it isn't, either at Sybase or Britton Lee) is not the key question, in my opinion. Jon Forrest forrest@sybase.com {pacbell,sun,{uunet,ucbvax}!mtxinu}!sybase!forrest 415-596-3422