SQL Server Forums
Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Search | Forum FAQ
 
Register Now and get your question answered!
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Other Forums
 Other Topics
 Official "XML SUCKS" thread
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 3

amachanic
SQL Server MVP

USA
169 Posts

Posted - 01/11/2005 :  21:35:56  Show Profile  Visit amachanic's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Someone asked for it, and now I have a great way to start it up...

Posted today in the microsoft.public.sqlserver.server newsgroup:

Subject: Validate URL
---
How can i Validate an URL by example "http://server1/default.htm"

And then i need to put timestamp
I will put inside a table...

I need to log that information for validate the Uptime for web pages

Thanx a Lot

Any idea??..maybe XML can help???
---

"maybe XML can help" ?!??! Why the hell could XML help!?!?

... okay, had to rant somewhere, now I feel much better

Edited by - amachanic on 01/11/2005 21:37:24

jsmith8858
Dr. Cross Join

USA
7423 Posts

Posted - 01/11/2005 :  21:40:18  Show Profile  Visit jsmith8858's Homepage  Reply with Quote
LOL ....

- Jeff
Go to Top of Page

Merkin
Funky Drop Bear Fearing SQL Dude!

Australia
4970 Posts

Posted - 01/11/2005 :  22:03:31  Show Profile  Visit Merkin's Homepage  Reply with Quote
"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say that there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." : Frank Zappa



Damian
Go to Top of Page

Frank Kalis
Constraint Violating Yak Guru

Switzerland
413 Posts

Posted - 01/12/2005 :  03:43:26  Show Profile  Visit Frank Kalis's Homepage  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by amachanic


Any idea??..maybe XML can help???
---

"maybe XML can help" ?!??! Why the hell could XML help!?!?

... okay, had to rant somewhere, now I feel much better


Well, if XML won't help here, 42 clearly will, since it is the ultimate answer

--
Frank
http://www.insidesql.de

Edited by - Frank Kalis on 01/12/2005 03:52:35
Go to Top of Page

ehorn
Flowing Fount of Yak Knowledge

USA
1631 Posts

Posted - 01/12/2005 :  07:35:38  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
So is it XML, or Stupidity, or any combination in between :), that sucks?

Edited by - ehorn on 01/12/2005 07:39:31
Go to Top of Page

Merkin
Funky Drop Bear Fearing SQL Dude!

Australia
4970 Posts

Posted - 01/12/2005 :  07:48:16  Show Profile  Visit Merkin's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Just stupidity I think.

I've been doing some XML this week for passing data between a flash app and some ASP.NET, it's working a treat. Fast to develop, fast to execute.



Damian
Go to Top of Page

ehorn
Flowing Fount of Yak Knowledge

USA
1631 Posts

Posted - 01/12/2005 :  08:03:48  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Sounds like the poster wanted to create a web site monitoring service.
Does XML have any potential use in this scenario, perhaps..

-as a repository for the urls they wish to manage
-for application, profile, and business rule settings
-as a repository for the log file(s)
-as a messaging format between layers

In this situation, is xml a candidate.. Yes. is it the best choice... Dont know :)

Edited by - ehorn on 01/12/2005 08:05:02
Go to Top of Page

Merkin
Funky Drop Bear Fearing SQL Dude!

Australia
4970 Posts

Posted - 01/12/2005 :  08:12:08  Show Profile  Visit Merkin's Homepage  Reply with Quote
XML is really too bulky for that sort of thing, there is a lot of disk overhead taken up by angle brackets in huge log files.

It's useful to do parsable logs for small things, NAnt and NUnit use it, but for an application you want to collect a lot of data, and report / aggregate a lot of data... I can't think of much worse.

Can you imaging reporting uptime percentages for an app that was polled every minute for a month by parsing xml logs ? EWWW. That's what SQL Server will do really well.

Messaging between tiers is a good use of it, slower than an optimised custom format, but great for gluing different bits together.


Damian
Go to Top of Page

amachanic
SQL Server MVP

USA
169 Posts

Posted - 01/12/2005 :  10:22:31  Show Profile  Visit amachanic's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Actually, I did work XML into my reply -- I showed the poster how to use the XMLHTTP object via the Object Automation XPs to send a request to the website and see if it comes back with status 200 :)
Go to Top of Page

rockmoose
SQL Natt Alfen

Sweden
3279 Posts

Posted - 01/12/2005 :  13:24:49  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Finally..

Yeah, XML SUCKS BIG TIME!


No one in their right mind would ever use XML for anything at all,
because it is absolutely useless for everything.

<paragraph>
<line>XML is the language of choice for all idiots,</line>
<line>and almost everyone is an Idiot,</line>
<line>and the only way to communicate with an idiot</line>
<line>is to speak the language of the idiot.</line>
</paragraph>

XML SUCKS BIGTIME! XML SUCKS BIGTIME! XML SUCKS BIGTIME! XML SUCKS BIGTIME!
thanks amachanic for this thread.

rockmoose
Go to Top of Page

X002548
Not Just a Number

15586 Posts

Posted - 01/12/2005 :  13:36:59  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Well I have to add this thread to the Official XML Rant BLOG Post

http://weblogs.sqlteam.com/brettk/archive/2004/09/01/1999.aspx

and visa versa (sp?)



Brett

8-)
Go to Top of Page

ehorn
Flowing Fount of Yak Knowledge

USA
1631 Posts

Posted - 01/12/2005 :  14:01:29  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Tell us how you really feel rockmoose :)

Can you share why/how you have developed this opinion?
Go to Top of Page

rockmoose
SQL Natt Alfen

Sweden
3279 Posts

Posted - 01/12/2005 :  14:36:39  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by ehorn

Tell us how you really feel rockmoose :)

Can you share why/how you have developed this opinion?



XML is a pretty crappy format/language ain't it?

Edit: removed smiley
rockmoose

Edited by - rockmoose on 01/12/2005 14:37:45
Go to Top of Page

X002548
Not Just a Number

15586 Posts

Posted - 01/13/2005 :  09:54:56  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Isn't it, that the benefit is interoperability between non heterogenous application/platforms....

Still looking for an answer to why it's good.

It's not good for relational stuff...

So I can see SELECTs, but Updates or Inserts?



Brett

8-)
Go to Top of Page

amachanic
SQL Server MVP

USA
169 Posts

Posted - 01/13/2005 :  09:57:12  Show Profile  Visit amachanic's Homepage  Reply with Quote
You're right, Brett, it's perfect for interop...

New slogan for XML:

"XML: When CSV is too complicated"
Go to Top of Page

Merkin
Funky Drop Bear Fearing SQL Dude!

Australia
4970 Posts

Posted - 01/13/2005 :  10:04:59  Show Profile  Visit Merkin's Homepage  Reply with Quote
I am dealing with a project at the moment where we have to pick up some data from a 3rd party company.

The 3rd party said they would supply xml, and I had to specify a schema.

No probs, I sent off the email.

What I got back looked like :

2,45,213
55,32,523





Damian
Go to Top of Page

jsmith8858
Dr. Cross Join

USA
7423 Posts

Posted - 01/13/2005 :  10:43:37  Show Profile  Visit jsmith8858's Homepage  Reply with Quote
>>"XML: When CSV is too complicated"

I Like it! seriously, that's perfect !

- Jeff
Go to Top of Page

ehorn
Flowing Fount of Yak Knowledge

USA
1631 Posts

Posted - 01/13/2005 :  21:32:30  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Lets rewind to mid-1981... A developer wants to look at some new-fangled database they call SQL/DS (anyone here remember that or what it became) - After designing some tables and playing around with some queries, questions were asked..

"Why does it matter if a DB engine is built on a methematical theory?"

"Why would we want to learn a foreign query language called SQL rather using nice, fast assembly language or COBOL programs?"

"Why did you just decompose our 2 nice, understandable records into 30 little tables just to join them back together again?"

and

"Why does it go so slow! ?"

Nonetheless, a new era was born - The relational era.

Relational engines were slow, and smart programmers could beat the engine every time. 5 years later the engines were a heck of alot faster, and programmers began to write a little sql and much less procedural code and they got much more work done.

So I can just smile when I see/hear folks shake their head about XML, XML data models, and/or XQuery semantics. The same eyebrows were raised not so long ago and I think the same raised eyebrows existed when mixing OO concepts and data first came on the scene.

Maybe the head shakers are right, maybe not. Time will tell...
Go to Top of Page

Merkin
Funky Drop Bear Fearing SQL Dude!

Australia
4970 Posts

Posted - 01/13/2005 :  23:05:28  Show Profile  Visit Merkin's Homepage  Reply with Quote
That's pretty much how I think of it now. Especially with .NET, there are a lot of smarter people than me working at optimising this stuff to the point where it's quick to develop, and quick to run.

It's still not for everything, but neither is a relational database.

That doesn't mean we can't laugh at people who use it stupidly



Damian
Go to Top of Page

amachanic
SQL Server MVP

USA
169 Posts

Posted - 01/13/2005 :  23:10:08  Show Profile  Visit amachanic's Homepage  Reply with Quote
There's a difference: We have the Relational Model of Data, which has solid logical foundations. There is no XML Model of Data, and no logical foundation on which to base one.
Go to Top of Page

robvolk
Most Valuable Yak

USA
15676 Posts

Posted - 01/14/2005 :  08:14:31  Show Profile  Visit robvolk's Homepage  Reply with Quote
quote:
There is no XML Model of Data, and no logical foundation on which to base one.
Whoa, that's gonna get a NICE response from the XML fanboys of the world.

<envy> Wish I'd thought of it. </envy>
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 3 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
SQL Server Forums © 2000-2009 SQLTeam Publishing, LLC Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.25 seconds. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000