Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!oliveb!amdahl!rtech!menace!dennism
From: dennism@menace.rtech.COM (Dennis Moore (x2435, 1080-276) INGRES/teamwork)
Newsgroups: comp.databases
Subject: More on RDBMS's in CASE tools
Keywords: CASE OODB RDBMS DBMS
Message-ID: <3360@rtech.rtech.com>
Date: 15 Aug 89 01:04:58 GMT
Sender: news@rtech.rtech.com
Reply-To: dennism@menace.UUCP (Dennis Moore (x2435, 1080-276) INGRES/teamwork)
Organization: Relational Technology, Inc. (Opinions expressed are the writers own)
Lines: 43

In article 3427, dlw@odi.com (Dan Weinreb) writes:
 *In article <3324@rtech.rtech.com> dennism@menace.rtech.COM (Dennis Moore (x2435, 1080-276) INGRES/teamwork) writes:
 *
 *   |Many CAD and CASE applications currently don't use any existing DBMS,
 *   |relational or otherwise.  Or if they do, they only use it at a high
 *   |level of granularity, or for peripheral functions.  Few or none of
 *   |them use a relational DBMS to store, say, individual transistors, or
 *   |whatever are the small elements in which the program primarily deals.
 *   |Since they're not using a relational DBMS now, there's no issue of
 *   |"staying with an evolving rdb".
 *
 *   This is common disinformation that OODB companies have been spreading in
 *   an attempt to generate a "need" for their product.  
 *
 *If you intend to use comp.databases as a forum for insult and
 *invective rather than information and discussion, I won't continue to
 *reply to your postings.
 *
 *						       Most CASE companies
 *   use RELATIONAL databases at the hearts of their products.  For instance,
 *   Cadre (teamwork) have used a number of commercial databases on different
 *   platforms, and are forging a MUCH CLOSER relationship with my company
 *(RTI).
 *   IDE (Software through Pictures) uses an in-house RDBMS called TROLL, and
 *are
 *   forging a MUCH CLOSER relationship with Sybase.
 *
 *I stand by my statement, above.  The largest U.S. CASE company, Index
 *Technologies, does not use any DBMS in its product.  They have

Dan, your posting bugged me, so I researched it.  Perhaps you could get a
spokesman for INDEX to comment.  In the July 24th 1989 issue of "Digital
Review," page 38, a product matrix indicates that INDEX contains an
internal *R*DBMS (note: RDBMS, not DBMS).  I spoke with the author of the
article, who claimed that the matrix was derived from product literature and
conversations with the companies.  Are INDEX liars or are you just prone
to hyperbole?  Before you flame, let me just state that an INDEX ad I have
right in front of me says that INDEX uses an internal RDBMS to store dictionary
objects.

Comments, Dan?

-- Dennis Moore, my own opinions, etc.