[plug] MySQL versus NT SQL Server

[Christian]

On Sun, May 14, 2000 at 10:50:40AM +0800, Nick Bannon wrote:
> On Sat, May 13, 2000 at 10:14:33AM +0800, Christian wrote:
> [...]
> > experiences using MySQL I strongly recommend that you don't use it if
> > you require any real RDBMS features -- it simply doesn't have them.
> > Even Access actually has these sorts of features.  If you want a
> [...]
> 
> Are you sure?
> Microsoft sells at least three database products - Visual FoxPro (for
> programming), Access (for clicky pointy officey sorts of things) and
> SQL Server (oh, you actually want something decent?), and I can only
> find claims of that sort about SQL Server.

Access isn't any sort of enterprise-level RDBMS but it does support
features like cascade-update and cascade-delete in a way more conformant
with SQL92 than any other DBMS I've used -- most do it with triggers,
Access does it automatically.  Of course there are still plenty of ways
that Access is highly-deficient but if someone already has a database in
Access then there are going to be issues like that where the new DBMS
probably doesn't have the set of features and there would be problems
during a port over.