| 1 |
"J. Roeleveld" <joost@××××××××.org> writes: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On Wednesday, December 30, 2015 09:32:55 PM lee wrote: |
| 4 |
>> "J. Roeleveld" <joost@××××××××.org> writes: |
| 5 |
>> > On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 08:03:25 PM Mick wrote: |
| 6 |
>> >> On Tuesday 29 Dec 2015 17:37:25 lee wrote: |
| 7 |
>> >> > Are we at the point where users are accepting to have to install and |
| 8 |
>> >> > maintain a fully fledged RDBMS just for a single application which |
| 9 |
>> >> > doesn't even need a database in the first place? |
| 10 |
>> >> |
| 11 |
>> >> Yes, a sad state of affairs indeed. I was hoping for the last 5-6 years |
| 12 |
>> >> that someone who can code would come to their senses with this |
| 13 |
>> >> application |
| 14 |
>> >> and agree that not all desktop application use cases require some |
| 15 |
>> >> enterprise level database back end architecture, when a few flat data |
| 16 |
>> >> files |
| 17 |
>> >> have served most users perfectly fine for years. I mean, do I *really* |
| 18 |
>> >> need a database for less that 60 entries in my address book?!! |
| 19 |
>> > |
| 20 |
>> > I'm no longer convinced a database isn't needed. |
| 21 |
>> > Kmail1 was slower than kmail2 is these days. |
| 22 |
>> |
| 23 |
>> We are talking here about a single application. Are users nowadays |
| 24 |
>> generally willing, inclined and in the position to deploy a RDBMS just |
| 25 |
>> in order to use a single application? Can they be expected to run |
| 26 |
>> several RDBMSs when the next application comes along and suggests mysql |
| 27 |
>> instead of postgresql? |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> Most applications use a database of one type or another. |
| 30 |
> Flatfiles are a bad idea when performance is important with large datasets. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Then why don't they all use postgresql or mysql? It might then make |
| 33 |
sense to install either of them. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
> My email is a large dataset. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
Not every large dataset is suited to be stored in a database like mysql |
| 38 |
or postgresql. That's particularly true for email. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
>> Ironically, in this case you require the RDBMS to be able to use an |
| 41 |
>> application which is too unstable to be used even without one. Why not |
| 42 |
>> use a better application for the same purpose instead? You wouldn't |
| 43 |
>> have to worry about your emails then. |
| 44 |
> |
| 45 |
> I don't worry about my emails. |
| 46 |
> I find kmail2 to be more stable and usable then kmail1. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
I'm surprised you're not worried when it seems not unusual that kmail |
| 49 |
becomes unstable and even randomly deletes email. |
Archives