[ List Archives Home ] [ Thread index for 2008 ]
[ Date index for 2008 ]
[ Author index for 2008 ]
[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
Hi Marc,
While all these things are true and valid, they "are" all available in
the Oracle version - and regardless of whether you like oracle or the
company, any move to this functionality would be "someone's" company.
And while you are considering the improvements you would get with this
functionality, don't forget the trade-offs you would have to make - you
may find in the long run from bitter experience they are not worth it.
I'm sure III would be happy to tell you the benefits of running their
proprietary database.
Carolyn
-----Original Message-----
From: innopac-bounces at innopacusers dot org
[
mailto:innopac-bounces at innopacusers dot org] On Behalf Of Marc Truitt
Sent: 15 February 2005 7:46 AM
To: IUG INNOPAC List
Subject: Re: Database language
hi steve,
well, i've never really thought of myself as an 'IT bureaucrat' <grin>,
but here's my take...
1) an sql-compliant backend would be far more accessible for direct
querying by those of us who would like to link-to or build interfaces to
local data outside the ILS;
2) an sql-compliant backend would be a far more flexible means of
extracting reporting data from my ILS than the present black box, aka
'create lists';
3) data in an sql-compliant backend is more portable and thus far more
likely (not guaranteed, but likely) to ease my migration headaches, come
the day -- gasp! -- when i decide to pick up my marbles and go play in a
different vendors ILS sandbox. i realize that it isn't III's job to make
it easier for me to bail, but portability *does* matter nonetheless.
i'm sure that if i thought about it for awhile, i could come up with
others; these are just off the top-o'my-head.
hth,
- m (aka 'IT bureaucrat') t
--
************************************************************************
*
Marc Truitt
Assistant Dean for Systems Voice : 713-743-8979
University of Houston Libraries e-mail : mtruitt at uh dot edu
114 University Libraries fax : 713-743-9811
Houston, TX 77204-2000 [note new number!] -> cell : 713-201-0351
"Well I left my happy home to see what I could find out
I left my folk and friends with the aim to clear my mind out
Well I hit the rowdy road and many kinds I met there
Many stories told me of the way to get there ..."
-- Cat Stevens
************************************************************************
*
Metcalf, Steve wrote:
> I'd be interested in hearing a bit about what the benefits would be.
> My suspicion has been that this development is driven by IT
> bureaucrats writing an sql-complicance requirement into RFPs as a
> matter of policy.
>
> Steve Metcalf The Evergreen State College
>
> -----Original Message----- From: innopac-bounces at innopacusers dot org
> [
mailto:innopac-bounces at innopacusers dot org]On Behalf Of Adriene Lim
> Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 2:20 PM To: mtruitt at uh dot edu; 'IUG
> INNOPAC List' Subject: RE: Database language
>
>
> I would LOVE this if it happened! WSU could gain all of the benefits
> of a fully functional, fully populated relational database, and using
> SQL, without having to use the "Oracle option," if this were done.
>
> - Adriene, WSU
>
>
>
> -----Original Message----- From: innopac-bounces at innopacusers dot org
> [
mailto:innopac-bounces at innopacusers dot org] On Behalf Of Marc Truitt
> Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 5:11 PM To: IUG INNOPAC List Subject:
> Re: Database language
>
> hi bill and zoltan,
>
> has this ever been pushed as an enhancement request? is there any
> reason it could not be?
>
> how about a virtual show-of-hands from those sites on this list that
> would be seriously interested seeing Innovative migrate to an
> open-source SQL-compliant back end?
>
> UH would certainly support such an effort.
>
> - mt
>
>
> Bill Hudson wrote:
>
>> Hi Zoltan, I thought the same thing about the mysql migration after
>> IUG last year,
>
> but
>
>> my sales rep checked for me and says that's not the case. There are
>>
>
> numerous
>
>> supporting databases in the system that are/will be converted, but
>> the
>
> core
>
>> dbase will not be converted. I was not happy to hear that as we
>> would love SQL compliance without having to pay for Mr. Ellison's
>> sailing hobby.
>>
>> If anyone has heard anything different from a reliable source, I
>> would definitely like to know about it. Thanks, BH
>>
>
>
>> Bill Hudson, Manager Information Technology Services Library System
>> of Lancaster County 1866 Colonial Village Lane, Suite 107
>> Lancaster, PA 17601 V. 717.207.0500 F.717.207.0500
>>
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message----- From: innopac-bounces at innopacusers dot org
>>> [
mailto:innopac- bounces at innopacusers dot org] On Behalf Of
>>> zoltan dot tomory at mobot dot org Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 3:08 PM
>>> To: innopac at innopacusers dot org Subject: RE: Database language
>>>
>>> Future plans seem to be that Millennium will be converted to a
>>> MySQL database based system over something like a five or ten
>>> year timeframe, phasing out the existing proprietary
>>> database/database language, if my recollections from IUG'04 are
>>> accurate.
>>>
>>> Writing their own database--that's gutsy! Changing a
>>> database--equally gutsy!
>>>
>>> One thing from the technical information was not clear to me: The
>>> Java Virtual Machine is platform independent & runs on a variety
>>> of platforms including Windows, Mac, and a bunch of others. So
>>> how come the Java clients typical of Millennium don't do Mac? The
>>> purpose of the JVM is to translate Java code to machine code of
>>> whatever platform there exists a JVM for with complete integrity
>>> & my understanding is that Sun, author of Java, has suffered to
>>> keep it so.
>>>
>>> Zoltan Tomory
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---
--
This message was distributed through the Innovative Users Group INNOPAC
list
Public replies: INNOPAC at innopacusers dot org
Update your subscription options:
http://innopacusers.org/mailman/listinfo/innopac
Home
Mailing list