# Stupid Database Questions



## Jonathan Randall (Oct 26, 2005)

I used to be a Network Administrator and Database programmer - but not since the First Bush was in office and the Soviet Union, while breaking up, was still a going concern (at least on paper). I'm curious, is Paradox still used? How about DBase? Clipper? Clarion PD (the easy, but clunky choice that I never used but others found useful)? What's the new programmable and executable (.exe's) database program being used today? Just curious and a bit nostalgic. I remember FoxPro being the bomb...


----------



## mantis (Oct 26, 2005)

Jonathan Randall said:
			
		

> I used to be a Network Administrator and Database programmer - but not since the First Bush was in office and the Soviet Union, while breaking up, was still a going concern (at least on paper). I'm curious, is Paradox still used? How about DBase? Clipper? Clarion PD (the easy, but clunky choice that I never used but others found useful)? What's the new programmable and executable (.exe's) database program being used today? Just curious and a bit nostalgic. I remember FoxPro being the bomb...


 i've been working with databases for like 2 years and I have NEVER heard of any of whatever you listed. we use SQL SERVER 2000, Oracle, mySql, Sybase, MS Access. we ususally write database scripts which include all the commands, queries, the tables, constraints, relationships, foreign and primary keys and so on. I do have a great MS SQL Server 2000 tutorial that I can email you maybe just PM me your email address if you want to take a look at it.


----------



## bignick (Oct 26, 2005)

Was Paradox Corel's answer to Access?


----------



## FearlessFreep (Oct 26, 2005)

I think Paradox preceeded Access.  Access was actually written by another company and bought by MS.

But, no, unless you are in a small shop of homegrown software that's been around for a long time, nobody uses Clipper, Paradox, FoxPro, etc....anymore


----------



## bignick (Oct 26, 2005)

FearlessFreep said:
			
		

> I think Paradox preceeded Access.  Access was actually written by another company and bought by MS.
> 
> But, no, unless you are in a small shop of homegrown software that's been around for a long time, nobody uses Clipper, Paradox, FoxPro, etc....anymore



It probably did, M$ has a tendency of waiting for a good product to come out, watch it, and buy something similar when it succeeds...


----------



## bignick (Oct 26, 2005)

By the way, OpenOffice now includes a database engine, I believe, based on HSQL.


----------



## Bigshadow (Oct 26, 2005)

Jonathan Randall said:
			
		

> I used to be a Network Administrator and Database programmer - but not since the First Bush was in office and the Soviet Union, while breaking up, was still a going concern (at least on paper). I'm curious, is Paradox still used? How about DBase? Clipper? Clarion PD (the easy, but clunky choice that I never used but others found useful)? What's the new programmable and executable (.exe's) database program being used today? Just curious and a bit nostalgic. I remember FoxPro being the bomb...



Hahaha, boy it has been a long time since I used them.  Let's see.  DBase... You can attach DBase into Microsoft Access.  DBase has fallen out of favor because it is a flat database.  Basically a series of files that represent individual databases that are unrelated.  In today's environment, relational databases are king.  If you do a little review of relational databases you will immediately see why they are so powerful.  I am not sure about Clipper.  I it might be used in some circles, but again I think it was a flat system which is probably why you don't hear about it much anymore.  Clarion, I am not sure, been a long time since I heard about that.  FoxPro is still around, it has a niche market.

Today's equivalent of those database applications you mentioned would be Microsoft Access, it is a relational database.  Of course there are MUCH more powerful databases today, such as Microsoft SQL Server and Oracle.  Seems like IBM has one called DB2.  Anyway, the last 3 are all sever based database services, whereas Microsoft Access can be run from your PC, by a novice.  In my line of work, I work daily with Microsoft SQL Server 2000.

I hope that helped.


----------



## Bigshadow (Oct 26, 2005)

bignick said:
			
		

> Was Paradox Corel's answer to Access?



Yes, I think so.  Paradox was relational as opposed to DBase or Clipper (at that time).  I think there is/was a DBase V or DBase VI.  I haven't used it since the DBase III and DBase IV days.


----------



## Bigshadow (Oct 26, 2005)

mantis said:
			
		

> we ususally write database scripts which include all the commands, queries, the tables, constraints, relationships, foreign and primary keys


Hahaha, all of those terms were foreign to DBase and Clipper, if I remember correctly.

Imagine this... DBase... A database was what we know of as a table. It had separate files that represented the indexes. There were no foriegn keys, or Primary keys. Constraints? Nada, constraints had to be enforced through application code.

Darn, this thread has dug up some OLLLDDDD memories!  HAHAHA


----------



## mantis (Oct 26, 2005)

Bigshadow said:
			
		

> Hahaha, all of those terms were foreign to DBase and Clipper, if I remember correctly.
> 
> Imagine this... DBase... A database was what we know of as a table. It had separate files that represented the indexes. There were no foriegn keys, or Primary keys. Constraints? Nada, constraints had to be enforced through application code.
> 
> Darn, this thread has dug up some OLLLDDDD memories!  HAHAHA


oh yah, you probably did not have relational databases, all were flat as i recall..
anyway, there's a new generation of databases that's being researched and developed now. it is called the object-oriented databases.
speaking of old memories, my father, who developed in prolog about 35 years ago, and used punch cards, was watching me code in C#!
he kept telling me about old memories for like 5 days, sir!


----------



## FearlessFreep (Oct 26, 2005)

_anyway, there's a new generation of databases that's being researched and developed now. it is called the object-oriented databases._

NOt so new, I was using GemStone for Smalltalk in the early-mid 90s


----------



## Bigshadow (Oct 26, 2005)

mantis said:
			
		

> anyway, there's a new generation of databases that's being researched and developed now. it is called the object-oriented databases.


That sounds cool. I have developed a web application prototype here that works similar on SQL 2000. Essentially, everything you want to store is an object. It works like Microsoft's site server. If you look at the base tables for site server, you will see how they do it. It is pretty cool! I am anxious to see this new database type. It will be fun to figure out how it works.



			
				mantis said:
			
		

> speaking of old memories, my father, who developed in prolog about 35 years ago, and used punch cards, was watching me code in C#!
> he kept telling me about old memories for like 5 days, sir!


Now... THAT was before my time. Fortunately I never had to work with punch cards. Thankfully programming isn't as tedious either, that certainly was NOT Rapid Application Development.


----------



## DavidCC (Oct 26, 2005)

Paradox and dBase were both file-driven, with a table held in a file.  Indexes would be held in seperate files.  Clipper was a development environment where you could write application code that used dBase data tables.  Paradox included its own dev envirnoment and interactive query tools.  They both implemented some pieces of the relational model, Paradox was a little bit closer to ER model mainly through its environment not it's internal data architecture.

I made many thousands of dollars doing Paradox, it was bery bery good to me.  It was possible to work wth it as if it was a fully ER compliant tool with foreign keys etc.

Paradox was from Borlund, and it did preceed Access.  The CEO of Borlund got MS-envy and squandered not only his company's money but also their IP and I am not even sure they are still in business.

Delphi came along in the mid-90s, similar file-driven data architecture but using an industry standard language (Pascal).  

But I think most of these have been eaten by Access.  Or by the simplification and open-source-ification of real ER systems (like SQL Server and Postgres and MySQL) to the point where now you can pretty much just have a real ERDBMS for free easily.


----------



## mantis (Oct 26, 2005)

FearlessFreep said:
			
		

> _anyway, there's a new generation of databases that's being researched and developed now. it is called the object-oriented databases._
> 
> NOt so new, I was using GemStone for Smalltalk in the early-mid 90s


these are object-oriented programming languages, not object-oriented "databases". 
This means you can store the database functions, stored procedures  and relationships in classes where you can instantiate throughout your code. 
You can inherit from them, you can override stored procedures, polymorphism, interfaces!
do you know how cool that is?

this can have a great impact on ERP, CRM, PRM and all that kind of management databases. 
i think sourceforge has implemented an open source OODB, dont know what the name of the project is though. i think it's Prevayler (SP?)


----------



## Bigshadow (Oct 26, 2005)

Your the first person I have heard that used Paradox like that.  Congrats!  

I used Paradox a little and thought it was nice.  I never built any apps on it, just helped others with it.



			
				DavidCC said:
			
		

> But I think most of these have been eaten by Access. Or by the simplification and open-source-ification of real ER systems (like SQL Server and Postgres and MySQL) to the point where now you can pretty much just have a real ERDBMS for free easily.


I would agree! I am now playing around with MySQL, I have it running on my SQL2000 server at home. BTW, you can freely get MSDE which is SQL Server with no GUI interface and supposedly no network access for use by desktop applications. I have been thinking about using it, since I am very fond of SQL Server and fluent in T-SQL.


----------



## DavidCC (Oct 26, 2005)

paradox was very strong in its day.

We had a multi-user system that incorporated warehouse, manufacturing, customer service, accounting, and mgmt reporting, full locking & multi0user support, ad-hioc queries and reporting... all the stuff you would use Oracle to do today.


----------



## Jonathan Randall (Oct 26, 2005)

bignick said:
			
		

> Was Paradox Corel's answer to Access?


 
No, the other way around.


----------



## Jonathan Randall (Oct 26, 2005)

Bigshadow said:
			
		

> Your the first person I have heard that used Paradox like that. Congrats!
> 
> I used Paradox a little and thought it was nice. I never built any apps on it, just helped others with it.
> 
> ...


 
3.5 and above was used heavily in that manner. Yes, they were relational - if not at the same level as newer off the shelf databases. I could not have done what I did with flat files. Clipper created .EXE's using DBASE language and yes, we had keys. Very much so. To get technical, my programs were always down to Third Normal Form. Hate to get technical, though, because I have forgotten so much and I don't have much interest in investing the time necessary to become proficient again.


----------



## Jonathan Randall (Oct 26, 2005)

DavidCC said:
			
		

> paradox was very strong in its day.
> 
> We had a multi-user system that incorporated warehouse, manufacturing, customer service, accounting, and mgmt reporting, full locking & multi0user support, ad-hioc queries and reporting... all the stuff you would use Oracle to do today.


 
That's exactly what I did with Paradox 3.5. Those were the days...


----------



## Jonathan Randall (Oct 26, 2005)

DavidCC said:
			
		

> I made many thousands of dollars doing Paradox, it was bery bery good to me. It was possible to work wth it as if it was a fully ER compliant tool with foreign keys etc.
> 
> Paradox was from Borlund, and it did preceed Access. The CEO of Borlund got MS-envy and squandered not only his company's money but also their IP and I am not even sure they are still in business.


 
So did I! It was great...

Yes, Phillippe Kahn, IIRC. What a shame. His company had a great Pascal, C, C++, Spreadsheet (Quattro Pro) and Paradox. If he had played his cards right, paying attention to the business instead of buying stuff (IIRC, expensive motorcycles, boats, houses, etc.), he would still be a major force in the industry, in my opinion.


----------



## Jonathan Randall (Oct 26, 2005)

mantis said:
			
		

> i've been working with databases for like 2 years and I have NEVER heard of any of whatever you listed. we use SQL SERVER 2000, Oracle, mySql, Sybase, MS Access. we ususally write database scripts which include all the commands, queries, the tables, constraints, relationships, foreign and primary keys and so on. I do have a great MS SQL Server 2000 tutorial that I can email you maybe just PM me your email address if you want to take a look at it.


 
Thanks, but I'm not up to learning a new database - even if it is modern. You make me feel old! LOL :>).The PC magazines were full of these programs in my day...  and the Internet was a curiosity for those who could afford 1200 baud modems.


----------



## OUMoose (Oct 27, 2005)

Jonathan Randall said:
			
		

> Thanks, but I'm not up to learning a new database - even if it is modern. You make me feel old! LOL :>).The PC magazines were full of these programs in my day...  and the Internet was a curiosity for those who could afford 1200 baud modems.


That's it.  Bob, can we put up an old BBS?    Have to dial in to it even.   This newfangled technology is spoiling everyone!


----------



## FearlessFreep (Oct 27, 2005)

Borland is still in business but I think they underwent a name change awhile ago, to something like Inprise, but then I think they changed back.  They still make a C++ compiler but their biggest claim to fame these days is probably Delphi, a version of ObjectPascal with some RAD tools.  I used it maybe three years ago in wrapping a Windows based UI around some Python command-line programs that did bioinformatics analysis


----------



## FearlessFreep (Oct 27, 2005)

_ these are object-oriented programming languages, not object-oriented "databases". 
 This means you can store the database functions, stored procedures and relationships in classes where you can instantiate throughout your code. 
 You can inherit from them, you can override stored procedures, polymorphism, interfaces!
 do you know how cool that is?_

Not quite.  Smalltalk is an OO Langauage, but GemStone is/was an OO database that was actually, at the time I was using it, specifically for Smalltalk.  GemStone later came out with a Java version.  There were a few others like ObjectStore and Versant I believe, that were OODBMS designed for specific languages, but I never had chance to use them much.  I *did* use GemStone, though, and it was a blast.  Very powerful and a lot easier to use as an application progreammer than an RDBMS.  

One problem I'm not sure if anyone got resolved properly was that different languages like Smalltalk, Java, C++, etc...have different object models so building an OODBMS that could be used by clients written in different languages was a bit tricky.  I'll admit I haven't used an OODBMS for several years now so I'm not really up on the state of the art.


----------



## DavidCC (Oct 27, 2005)

OODBMS is already passing away, largely unadopted.  it is being replaced by persistence engines (for example Hibernate) that reside in JVM's and provide object persistence, not only DBMS-neutral but DBMS-invisible!  You just instantiate your class, pass the key value to the constructor, and it handles all of the data retrieval.  Same for saving changes to the object, full support for 2-phase commits etc completely hidden from the application developer.


----------



## FearlessFreep (Oct 27, 2005)

Actually, David, you just described GemStone circa early 90s, except it used a Smalltalk VM rather than a Java VM.


----------



## Bigshadow (Oct 27, 2005)

DavidCC said:
			
		

> OODBMS is already passing away, largely unadopted. it is being replaced by persistence engines (for example Hibernate) that reside in JVM's and provide object persistence, not only DBMS-neutral but DBMS-invisible! You just instantiate your class, pass the key value to the constructor, and it handles all of the data retrieval. Same for saving changes to the object, full support for 2-phase commits etc completely hidden from the application developer.



I haven't used these systems yet. I don't use Java very often. We are a Microsoft shop and I work almost entirely with .NET and SQL2000 (Now). Not to mention I have spent a great dealing of time as a Database analyst as well as software developer, so I have no problems in dealing with SQL Server.

As for those systems, I like it and sort of don't like it.    It is sort of like the black box approach.  Personally, I like to be able to open the black box and know how it works 

Systems like these are underpinned by a DBMS, correct? They have to commit that data to something less volatile than memory, especially when dealing with transactions. So I am assuming there is a database underneath just there is a middle teir that does all the IO with the database and provides an object interface to the developer. I have written .NET components that do similar to that (application specific) as well as DLLs.

I really like to write middle teir code.  Lots of fun!


----------

