Click here to monitor SSC

Phil Factor's Phrenetic Phoughts

Simple-Talk columnist
The wilder shores of Transact SQL    Phil on Twitter   Phil on SQL Server Central  Phil on BOS

Technology and Testosterone

Published Friday, October 24, 2008 3:41 PM

Like every other IT manager, I’ve always been instinctively attracted to technologies that I don’t really understand.  I’m not sure why this is. Is it part of the human condition?  I suspect that it may be due to one of the puzzling side-effects of testosterone, which is the urge to have the latest technology.

Marketing department know this, and exploit it.  The famous photo on the Microsoft website shows the handsome young executive looking smugly at his PC whilst a very class-looking chick in a tight skirt leans over him to stare thoughtfully at the screen .  "Look." says your  Id. "See that? All you need is SQL Server 2008 on your PC and the girls will come flocking."  "Shush," says your SuperEgo , "What nonsense. She can’t even see what version of SQL Server it is. Besides, a complacent dodo like him is probably just playing  ‘Grand Theft Auto’, and she’s just sadly brooding on the shallowness of the male psyche”.  “Ah,” says my Ego, “rationally, the latest version of SQL Server will be faster, safer, and full of toys, ..er.. important new features that will ensure productivity gains across the enterprise.” “…and classy young ladies” adds the Id.

To counteract this, I long ago adopted the habit of regularly reading the IT magazines, but only if they are five years old.  For their rich, but unintended, humor these cannot be beaten. There is a laugh on every page.  Technologies that seemed exciting and magical then are now treated universally with the contempt of familiarity.  The Marketing babble that was once accepted unquestioningly then by earnest journalists and industry authorities, is now difficult to read without emitting a low whistle. To add spice to my reading, I  have a set of Byte Magazines from the 1980s and 90s. Articles such as ‘Database Wars Revisited’ (Oct 1990), predicting the imminent demise of the relational model in favour of ‘Object –Oriented’ Data Repositories are fascinating for getting the future so startlingly wrong.  The Adverts are endlessly diverting ‘There’s a new leader in the relational Database management world. Its name is FoxPro’ .  Serious articles are rich in unintended comedy:  ‘The future of computing could be Soviet software running on Taiwanese hardware’ Well, half-right anyway!

If ever you feel the need to get over-excited at the PDC, to gasp with wonder over the latest ‘Service’ to be clamped onto the side of SQL Server, or the new application architecture from Microsoft, then just calm down and convince yourself that whatever it is that Marketing man is telling you may not be God’s Honest Truth.

At this point, I stopped writing. As I was at home, I popped up into the attic to get my 1985 Jonos  Portable computer out.  I switched it on and booted it up, fired up WordStar , the wordprocessor, to view a document.  Hmm.  Ten seconds. Came back down, with cobwebs in my hair, and I tried it with my current Vista dual core 2 gig Laptop, with Word and this document. 3 minutes and ten seconds.  Progress!

Comments

 

ilyak said:

"predicting the imminent demise of the relational model in favour of ‘Object –Oriented’ Data Repositories are fascinating for getting the future so startlingly wrong"
Well, I hope this would happen soon!
Because SQL/relational sucks sooo badly for building content management systems and other web stuff which requires a lot of lowly-structured information, with read often, write rarely.
Like, this blog hosting. One might not feel the pain, but it is here: the persistence layer which just need to store and query objects becomes something like half of the codebase and accounts for half of the development effort.

Now, JCR, Apache Jackrabbit, seems to become mature enough. I hope to migrate to it. Kind of SQL-database would do the trick, too.
October 24, 2008 2:34 PM
 

Arles said:

There's a cyclical nature of repackaging old technology as newer ones, the only difference is that it comes in a shiny new package with and fancy name to boost.  I'm fairly amused at a technologist who can throw out the latest buzz word like LINQ, but is unable to differentiate a LEFT JOIN from a RIGHT JOIN statement.  
October 27, 2008 9:21 AM
 

timothyawiseman@gmail.com said:

ilyak, I will be astonished if Relational databases die anytime soon.  Now, what I do fully expect is that more Object-oriented databases will rise alongside relational ones and they will coexist, each with their own niche.  

Just as we have more than one type of programming langauge for different niches coexisting nicely, I suspect we will have more than one truly different type of database architecture.
October 27, 2008 6:17 PM
 

Andrew Clarke said:

I once made a very painful mistake: I was asked by a European investment bank to assess the potential of a startup company that had invented an Object-Oriented DMBS.  There have been plenty of these developed since around 1986, but this one had a certain ingenuity and realism about it. Additionally, there were three reference sites full of smiling customers.  It was in about 2002.

I'd been trying to develop one myself as a blue-sky project, and I was thereby able to appreciate how clever they'd been in tackling some of the fundamental intrinsic difficulties of scaling up from a pilot with little data into a commercial system.  I advised the bank to invest. Oops. The OODBMS and its company limped on for a few years, but I believe that it never made a profit.

There are OODBMSs around, plenty of them, but in general they've failed to live up to the promise so confidently predicted for them in 1990 magazine articles.
October 28, 2008 4:11 AM
 

randyvol said:

Phil - I chuckled all the way through your musings as I have often had similar experiences.

Couple of observations that really date myself -
My first day on the job right out of college was as a sales representative for the now-defunct Burroughs Corporation.  They had just released a new mainframe, a wonder of technology that <gasp> offered a maximum 32Kb of main memory (who could ever use so much?), and <oh my gosh> support for TWO CRT devices (what would one use the 2nd CRT for?)

Their should be a committee to manage buzzword life-cycles.  The current 'LINQ', which I don't pretend to have a clue about; causes my brain to recall a Burroughs product by, if my mind recalls accurately, the same name.  One could write in LINQ, compile the product which would, as I recall amongst other things, compile your whole COBOL program, plus the data communications logic, and I believe also create the DML, DDL, and DCL for the SQL database.  
October 28, 2008 12:09 PM
 

Phil Factor said:

Gosh, Randy.. and you look so young!
October 28, 2008 12:24 PM
You need to sign in to comment on this blog
Latest articles
A first look at SQL Server 2012 Availability Group Wait Statistics
 If you are trouble-shooting an AlwaysOn Availability Group topology, a study of the wait statistics... Read more...

SQL Server Prefetch and Query Performance
 Prefetching can make a surprising difference to SQL Server query execution times where there is a high... Read more...

SSIS Basics: Setting Up Your Initial Package
 When working with databases, the use of SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS) is a skill that often... Read more...

Checking Out SQL Backup Pro 7’s New Automatic Backup Verification
 Wouldn't it be great to offload the daily chore of checking the integrity of your production... Read more...

Chuck Lathrope: DBA of the Day
 Chuck Lathrope was a finalist for the Exceptional DBA of the Year award in 2009. We contacted him to... Read more...