🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1586@ccnysci.UUCP> alexis@ccnysci.UUCP (Alexis Rosen) writes:
>In article <22863@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> steve@violet.berkeley.edu
>(Steve Goldfield) writes:
>>We are seriously considering moving a medium-sized
>>database (about 10 tables, maximum 6,000 records)
>>from McMax to Foxbase's networked version. [...]
>
> [ reply with sensible-sounding suggestions for configuration and a
>   caveat about multiuser TOPS ]
>
>A note about performance: for files that Foxbase opens read/write in shared
>(not EXCLUSIVE) mode, expect a 50% slowdown. Obviously, it can't cache indices.
>(This effect will be seen with any good program, not just FB+).

Gee, this doesn't sound like the effect of a good program, it sounds 
like the effect of a limitation.  Why is it not possible to cache
indices?  Because of FoxBase design?  Or characteristics of the networked
Mac environment?  

I don't dispute the factual content re FoxBase & TOPS, I just have a
problem with generalizing the limitations of this program and/or
environment to all (DBMS) software.  FoxBase itself may have many fine
features.  But comp.databases readers should not be misled into thinking 
that other (Mac-compatible) packages must have this limitation.  I feel
that Alexis' enthusiastic endorsement of FoxBase is leading him to 
make erroneous statements about other DBMS software in general.

>Alexis Rosen
>alexis@ccnysci.{uucp,bitnet}

-Tim Wood
Sybase, Inc. / 6475 Christie St. / Emeryville, CA / 94608	  415-596-3500
tim@sybase.com		{pacbell,pyramid,sun,{uunet,ucbvax}!mtxinu}!sybase!tim
Voluntary disclaimer: This message is solely my personal opinion.
		      It is not a representation of Sybase, Inc.  OK.