Hi James, You raise some interesting points. There is nothing secret about the benchmarks. We will make the code that was used to run benchmarks available to anyone who wants to see it and verify results. If you want to find a third party to verify, be my guest. The benchmark report goes into some depth on the design and rationale for the benchmark. Frankly, as much as I like the idea about taking DeviceSQL open source, you don't need to do so, just to verify performance claims.
Do you need to read the code to verify reliability as your next few sentences seems to imply? For that to be true, the reader would have to be able to spot bugs through inspection. While that is certainly one way to spot bugs, I seriously doubt that any shop would rely on code inspection, when millions of dollars of potential recall costs are on the line. In fact the SQLite marketing does not rely on code inspection as its argument for why the code is reliable. Check it out. All of that said, I do admire the elegance of the SQLite code. It makes entertaining reading. Unfortunately elegance does not translate into performance or reliability. Regards, Steve James Steward-2 wrote: > > steveweick wrote: >> Richard has it right this time. Today DeviceSQL uses no SQLite code. One >> of >> the things we might consider is bolting the SQLite parser/front end to >> our >> table engine, in theory to get the both worlds. Just an idea at the >> moment. >> > Such an interesting discussion to be following. I must say though, it > seems DeviceSQL has opened the door to speculation due to > unsubstantiated claims in advertising, as far as I see it. IMHO, so > long as there is no independent, unbiased, side by side test results > presented somewhere by some reliable source, there will always be some > room for "ifs" and "buts" by both sides. > > Maybe DeviceSQL should go open source, so the public can judge for them > selves the qualities of the two products. There would still be money to > be made from paid support. Who knows, both parties could benefit, and > customers too. At least there'd be a clearer view of the pros and cons. > > There is something to be said for a product being open source, that is > the code is scrutinized by the world. Closed shop code can possibly > still be very good, but without seeing it, how would we know? Reminds > me of a story about a cat: dead or alive, we won't know until we open > the box it's in, and prior to that, is it only half dead? > > One only has to look at the MSDN code examples to see the ugliness of > closed source code development...(sorry Bill) > > JS. > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/DeviceSQL-tp14297970p14328763.html Sent from the SQLite mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
