| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 113.1 | A little DRS Info | KYOA::JASTREBSKI | | Fri Apr 22 1988 01:51 | 37 |
| Hiromu,
I am new to Digital (this is my 2nd week) and am far from an RDB/VMS
expert. I am trying to learn as much about RDB as possible (that
is why I was reading this conference and discovered your note).
I worked with ADM's Data Retrieval System (DRS) for some time
about a year ago. One major difference between RDB/VMS and DRS
that you may be able to use as a selling point for RDB is that DRS
is NOT based on the relational model but is instead a hierarchical
(CODASYL) dbms. You state in your note that DRS is for "complicated"
systems. If these "complicated" applications are not well-defined
or likely to change, the flexibility of the relational model and
therefor of RDB/VMS make it the right choice!
Also, at the time that I worked with DRS (things may have changed
in 1 year), their tools were not nearly as strong as what I have seen
that DEC has to offer. They had their own report writer language
(RPW) which was cumbersome to use and not for the novice. The
reporting commands within their DML where far more difficult to
learn than Datatrieve's english-like language.
They did not have a product that was equivalent to TEAMDATA and
they had no precompiler but instead you could embed XBS calls in
your COBOL, FORTRAN, etc. programs (this was VERY time consuming
as these calls did not resemble the data manipulation language of
DRS).
Point out to your customer that RDB/VMS and the VAX Information
Architecture solution offers excellent end-user tools in Teamdata
and Datatrieve. Unless ADM has made remarkable improvments in a
year, these should be a major plus.
Hope this helps.
Tom Jastrebski
|
| 113.2 | Thanks a lot !! | OSKV01::KATOH | We are working on digital stream | Fri Apr 22 1988 17:34 | 0 |
| 113.3 | Does DEC Use It? | SYOMV::JACOBS | | Thu Apr 28 1988 19:31 | 10 |
| Two years ago, while investigating different DBMSs for use in a
Geographic Information System, (GIS) I reviewed DRS. I was interested
because it uses bitmaps in memory to do joins and was touted as
being very fast. I saw one GIS which had been successfully built using
it. My assessment of it was that it was ugly but fast. Anyway,
at the time, the DRS sales rep I was talking with said that DEC's Colorado
Support Center database was built using DRS. Does anybody know
if this is or was true?
- Matt Jacobs
|
| 113.4 | DRS not used anymore at the CSCs | CSC32::STENOISH | Jim Stenoish, VIA TBU, CSC/CS | Wed May 04 1988 03:00 | 3 |
| The CSC's in the US no longer use DRS for their call tracking system.
Currently, the 'live' database uses RMS files while the 'reporting'
database uses Rdb/VMS. Even Digital can use Digital-only solutions!
|
| 113.5 | From an X-ADM employee! | KYOA::FARESE | If a database is involved... | Thu May 05 1988 00:56 | 17 |
| I worked as a hotline contact, trainer, consultant, and development
programmer for ADM for 5 years before coming to Digital. DRS is
certainly NOT relational and has none of the flexibility of the
relational model. It is FAST for complex databases and can handle
many users and many records. The XBS interface is quick and to
the point for handling transactions (Let's the programmer get to
the record however he wants.)
DRS is an old system (roots are from the early 70's on IBM 1130's)
and the internals are still EBCDIC. They are building new tools
to make it more user friendly, and have plans to rewrite the kernel
in C (currently FORTRAN) so that it is more portable. All new code
is in C.
Let me know if you need anymore info. I still have contacts at
ADM.
|