🚀 go-pugleaf

cmk128@hotmail.com wrote:
> Hi
>    My name is Peter, from Hong Kong, I am going to launch an
> open-soource SQL-92 database project. The goal of this project is to
> develop a SQL92 database using c++ with standard library only (no
> yacc).
>   If you are willing to join this project. Please leave your name, your
> 
> background, home country and ICQ/MSN number.
> 
> 
> thanks 
> from Peter (cmk128@hotmail.com)
> 

Sounds nice, but why not helping in other open source projects who are already building a database.
(or: what will be unique in this project,  are there people interested in things that open source databases of today don't have ...)

anyway: good luck! ;-)

>    My name is Peter, from Hong Kong, I am going to launch an
> open-soource SQL-92 database project. The goal of this project is to
> develop a SQL92 database using c++ with standard library only (no
> yacc).
>   If you are willing to join this project. Please leave your name, your
> background, home country and ICQ/MSN number.

I can't fathom why the world would be better served "if only there
were another open source database that tries to conform to a
superceded standard and that tries to avoid using yacc."

I don't get up in the morning and wonder "Why do so many OSS databases
use yacc when they oughtn't?"

A reason to start a new project would be to try to do things that
others aren't doing.

For instance, there are limited options at this point in terms of
main-memory databases; that could be a worthy idea.  Trying to create
an OSS alternative to Red Brick or Teradata might be interesting.

An interesting project that was started (and dropped) was Backplane
(the main mover has been spending his time working on a FreeBSD "fork"
called DragonflyBSD); it was designed as a replicated, transactional,
fault-tolerant database "core."  I was quite skeptical that it would
ever work well, but the design was distinctive enough that it seemed
worth finding out if it could work.

But if you haven't any ideas that specific about what the design
*should* look like, maybe you would be better served by looking into
an existing project and seeing if you could contribute something
there.
-- 
If this was helpful, <http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=cbbrowne> rate me
http://cbbrowne.com/info/rdbms.html
PALINDROME spelled backwards is EMORDNILAP. 

Have you looked at version 5.0 of MySQL?

Because i want to have the ablilty to build up a database system. There
is nothin unique in the beginning of this project, it is repeated
somebody's road. but i think it is worth me to walk.

<cmk128@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1133149944.496013.55390@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Because i want to have the ablilty to build up a database system. There
> is nothin unique in the beginning of this project, it is repeated
> somebody's road. but i think it is worth me to walk.
>

Groan, look progress is made by standing on the shoulders of what others
have gone before.  You aren't progressing you are reinventing the wheel and
using the guise of open source projects to do it.  Try doing something new.
Jim

Thanks for comment
      But i believe if i can do the same as pioneer can do, after all,
there must be some inventions in my copy. Look at the japanese, in 60s,
they copy american's electronic product. But i think they are must
better than american now. Look at chinese spaceship too.
thanks
from Peter

cmk128@hotmail.com wrote:
> Thanks for comment
>       But i believe if i can do the same as pioneer can do, after all,
> there must be some inventions in my copy. Look at the japanese, in 60s,
> they copy american's electronic product. But i think they are must
> better than american now. Look at chinese spaceship too.
> thanks
> from Peter

Well, I say go for it.  Good for you.  People standing on other
people's shoulders all the time is silly, especially from the learning
aspect.

Todd

cmk128@hotmail.com wrote:
> Because i want to have the ablilty to build up a database system. There
> is nothin unique in the beginning of this project, it is repeated
> somebody's road. but i think it is worth me to walk.

But WHY SQL92?
Why not SQL:1999 or even SQL:2003?

And like others, I don't understand you aversion to YACC.
  ed

> cmk128@hotmail.com wrote:
>> Thanks for comment
>>       But i believe if i can do the same as pioneer can do, after all,
>> there must be some inventions in my copy. Look at the japanese, in 60s,
>> they copy american's electronic product. But i think they are must
>> better than american now. Look at chinese spaceship too.
>> thanks
>> from Peter
>
> Well, I say go for it.  Good for you.  People standing on other
> people's shoulders all the time is silly, especially from the
> learning aspect.

If it appeared that the project was going to lead to something novel,
that would be one thing.

But the point of the project seem to be to implement a database based
on three factors:

 a) A 13-year old standard that has been followed by newer ones;

 b) The use of C++ as an implementation language;

 c) The *lack* of use of Yacc.

Only one of those factors seems to relate to anything intriniscally
about databases.

There's no indication of sorts of things that might be interesting,
such as:

 - What storage model is planned?
 - What relationship will this system have to the relational model?
 - What license is planned?

As things stand, it sounds like the plan is to take a block of marble
and chip away everything that doesn't look like an elephant.  All we
know are a few things *not* intended.  Knowing what *is* intended
would be more likely to elicit interest.
-- 
output = ("cbbrowne" "@" "gmail.com")
http://linuxdatabases.info/info/rdbms.html
What hair color do they put on the driver's licenses of bald men?