Xref: utzoo comp.unix.questions:5079 comp.databases:630
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!bellcore!faline!ulysses!gamma!pyuxp!pyuxe!pyuxf!robf2
From: robf2@pyuxf.UUCP (robert fair)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions,comp.databases
Subject: Re: Unix databases for service report storage and acquisition (Wanted)
Summary: UNITS - ARRGH
Keywords: database
Message-ID: <234@pyuxf.UUCP>
Date: 18 Jan 88 15:33:38 GMT
References: <4914@nsc.nsc.com> <995@cblpf.ATT.COM>
Organization: Bell Communications Research
Lines: 31
Posted: Mon Jan 18 10:33:38 1988

In article <995@cblpf.ATT.COM>, ege@cblpf.ATT.COM (Ernie Englehart) writes:
> In article <4914@nsc.nsc.com> andrew@nsc.nsc.com (Andrew Lue) writes:
> >Can anyone recommend a DBMS that can be used in a service center
> Look into the UNIx Transaction System, UNITS.  It is a database manager
> developed especially for UNIX system V.

Having had the misfortune to use UNITS and its related products (TUX etc)
for a period while a contractor at AT&T all I can say is - AVOID AT ALL COSTS !
My comments stem from both using the product and browsing the source code.

The database supports a poor implementation of SQL, very minimalistic.
The query optimizer really ought to be shot.

The report writer appears to be a direct INGRES rip-off (the source code 
even referred the reader to the INGRES documenation !)

The screen handling part is so cumbersome to use the project I was on
wanted to get rid of it.

The documentation was *terrible* - either masses of very high level garbage
which said nothing, or lots of UN*X-style man pages which said even less.

The above comments refer to the version of UNITS available within AT&T
around 10/87 (20.?) and express a personal opinion only.


-- 
Robert L. Fair
Bell Communications Research/CHC
Piscataway, NJ
{ihnp4,allegra}!pyuxww!pyuxf!robf2