From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,c9d5fc258548b22a
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!novia!transit3.readnews.com!news-out.readnews.com!postnews3.readnews.com!not-for-mail
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 01:05:53 -0500
From: Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.14) Gecko/20110221 Thunderbird/3.1.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: How do I write directly to a memory address?
References: 
 <67063a5b-f588-45ea-bf22-ca4ba0196ee6@l11g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
 <31c357bd-c8dc-4583-a454-86d9c579e5f4@m13g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
 <05a3673e-fb97-449c-94ed-1139eb085c32@x1g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
 <4d4c232a$0$28967$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net> <4D4D6506.50909@obry.net>
 <4d50095f$0$22393$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
 <wcck4hb95jz.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <4d6d56c4$0$11509$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
 <16u9ka51wbukr$.1fj2sb73j9rv6.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4d6d627b$0$11509$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
 <74986d0a-0d5b-4396-8c77-adff72e870a2@d26g2000prn.googlegroups.com>
 <4d6eafc7$0$17913$a8266bb1@postbox2.readnews.com>
 <op.vrqh3z1blzeukk@jellix.jlfencey.com>
 <4d6eb309$0$17913$a8266bb1@postbox2.readnews.com>
 <op.vrqodiwglzeukk@jellix.jlfencey.com>
 <4d6ed212$0$17960$a8266bb1@postbox2.readnews.com>
 <8985b302-96b8-4f22-aa4d-d64945047f90@r4g2000prm.googlegroups.com>
 <4d6ee8e2$0$14912$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net> <ikn0a7$7g0$1@munin.nbi.dk>
In-Reply-To: <ikn0a7$7g0$1@munin.nbi.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <4d6f2fcb$0$14547$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 420fdba6.usenet-news.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=B@d0o@Y=iSi36dX[YAVR8i^oXGM_6\KV`mX0AG3X_jUod2X8V[>OoAfUDJR]nRiFOl`40[fPeBVEa^O?X2KSlI0d;jPfRHRcDDb
X-Complaints-To: abuse@usenet-news.net
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:18730
Date: 2011-03-03T01:05:53-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 3/2/2011 10:01 PM, Randy Brukardt wrote:
> Relational databases have their uses, but they're wildly
> overused for things that are only weakly related to transactional data. As
> Dmitry said, there are better approaches to persistence.

Are there? Relational databases have the feature of *working*. They are
among the most widely used programs, especially in the finance industry
(so you are in fact benefiting from the money Wall Street spends on
them), they scale well from tiny table sizes to enormous ones, and
using them is a well-understood art. If you're working for a company of
reasonable size, it is most likely already using databases, so you can
piggyback on the services the company is already using for maintenance,
support and backup.

Do those "better" methods buy you all that?

 > Nor can any URL cause the launching of a shell, because it doesn't have
 > the capability to run another program

Normal web servers offer the ability to launch scripts based on URL
patterns (CGI, remember?), so this means you have failed to implement
a standard bit of functionality.