Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!hscfvax!pavlov
From: pavlov@hscfvax.harvard.edu (G.Pavlov)
Newsgroups: comp.databases
Subject: Re: Relational
Message-ID: <498@hscfvax.harvard.edu>
Date: 14 Jan 88 18:24:02 GMT
References: <2556@sfsup.UUCP> <6482@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> <271@esquire.UUCP>
Organization: Health Sciences Computing Facility, Harvard University
Lines: 37

In article <271@esquire.UUCP>, roger@esquire.UUCP (Roger Reid) writes:
> In article <2556@sfsup.UUCP> prj@sfsup.UUCP (P.Jayne) writes:
> >....... The only
> >poster so far who knows of an actual complex database using "relational
> >technology" responded by email.  
> 
> We have what we believe to be one of the most complex relational
> database applications around running here on Britton Lee IDMs.
> They were done relational because there was no other way to
> do it that would work as well as we needed it to .....

  We do not have the most complex application on a relational dbms, but it
  is substantial nevertheless: apx. 250 tables, the need for 80-100 logical
  views into various overlapping subsets of the tables, etc.

  We chose a relational dbms because it was our estimate that we would have
  to at least triple our programming staff otherwise (rather difficult on
  research budgets...).  Why ? because the database has to also be highly
  dynamic, with 4-6 tables being added per month, 1-2 being retired, and new
  views of the data added at the rate of 2 per month.  

  The relational dbms (which is not that important, but it happens to be com-
  mercial Ingres, which does give you QUEL) has allowed us to build a complete-
  ly data-independent set of core applications.  As new tables are brought on-
  line, "administrative" tables are updated which describe specialized details
  about the tables, new logical views, etc, to the core applications.

  - thus, we have reduced structure modification to a data updating task, for
    most cases.

  Has this resulted in a "slower", less efficient system ?  Maybe.  But I do
  know that I can maintain highly acceptable throughput with additional hard-
  ware for a fraction of what the additional programming staff would cost.
  And, the programmers on board can concentrate on new applications instead
  of constantly rehashing the existing software base...

   greg pavlov, fstrf, amherst, ny.