Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!know!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uflorida!beach.cis.ufl.edu!rmy
From: rmy@beach.cis.ufl.edu (Rasthiyaadu Yakaa)
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: Re: Comment on the "Third-Generation Database System Manifesto"
Keywords: OODB, Extended Relational DBMS, Next-Generation DBMS
Message-ID: <24558@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU>
Date: 25 Sep 90 00:39:31 GMT
References: <21179@hercules.csl.sri.com>
Sender: news@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU
Reply-To: rmy@beach.cis.ufl.edu ()
Organization: UF CIS Department
Lines: 44



Oh, how I  agree ....

Having read both articles, i.e. The Object Oriented Database System 
Manifesto and The Third Generation Database System Manifesto, I was
pretty dismayed with the approach taken by the latter. Being in the
midst of a Ph.D in databases, and being quite aware of the current
developments in the field (both research and applied), it seemed that
the latter article, the 3G DB manifesto, viz, The Third Generation 
Database System Manifesto presented on many occasions an anti-OODB slant, 
taking (as the posting by Hsieng stated) quite misleading arguments to 
make a case. As the posting indicated, the 3G manifesto contained both
JUSTIFIABLE and MISLEADING arguments. The JUSTIFIABLE arguments MUST be 
presented -- after all this is a technical paper, and it should be 
expected. There are no reasons or excuses for presenting MISLEADING 
arguments. Clearly, the database community is the loser, if articles
can take such views. The OODB manifesto, on the other hand, made a
valid attempt to define what features an OODB must contain.

Clearly there is a place for extended relational systems, and the Third
Generation Database System Manifesto should have made a case accordingly,
presenting and painting an unbiased portrait. Taking a dig at OODBMS
(in spite of whatever shortcomings, they may have) is turning one's
back on emerging technology. If OODBMSs have any major shortcomings,
then either solutions to overcome these will appear or OODBMSs will
reach a level where they are reasonably useful or else, OODBMS
will fade away. From the plethora of researchers and organizations
currently active in OODBMSs, it seems that OODBMSs are clearly
alive and kicking .. if extended relational systems were 
superior, I for one personally, believe that the amount of research
and development carried out on OODBMSs will be far lesser. 

BTW, I am sometimes puzzled to see extended relational systems
being called OODBMSs. Recently, in this newsgroup, POSTGRES was
described as being an OODBMS by someone from the postgres group
at Berkeley. Is is possible that some extended relational systems
can be relational and also object oriented BUT not vice versa
(i.e. an object oriented system is object oriented but not relational).
Or are we simply playing with terminology.

yaseen