On Thu, 24 Feb 2000 08:17:12 Cary O'Brien wrote: > > <snip> > >As you've probably guessed, I'm a big database fan. Except in very >special cases, my feeling is that the effort up front in getting it to >work with the database will be repayed many times over in the >flexability of reporting. Plus knowing about RDBMSs may come in handy >for other tasks. > Yeah, I'm on Cary's side here. Storing large numbers of measurement "tuples", matching them up with previous data (like for delta computation), matching them up with slowly-changing data (like port speeds and types), etc. etc. are all things that are so easy in a procedural SQL-capable environment. We use Oracle's PL/SQL to pick up inside the database where Tcl leaves off outside the database - but if I had to store all those structures in flat files and use Tcl data types to keep track of them it would be a huge programming effort.
If there were MIB compilers that ran inside an SQL database I could probably replace the majority of my Tcl/Tnm code. In fact I looked at SnmpQL but while the product was good it didn't go far enough for what we needed. So my other option is to add SQL capability to my Tcl/Tnm scripts. Either way I still need the RDBMS.
Cheers Stuart Austin
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==-- Share what you know. Learn what you don't. -- !! This message is brought to you via the `tkined & scotty' mailing list. !! Please do not reply to this message to unsubscribe. To subscribe or !! unsubscribe, send a mail message to <email@example.com>. !! See http://wwwsnmp.cs.utwente.nl/~schoenw/scotty/ for more information.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 08 2001 - 15:27:37 MET