[Info-vax] CRTL and RMS vs SSIO

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 10/9/2021 6:52 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
> On 10/9/2021 2:22 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 10/9/2021 12:47 PM, Stephen Hoffman wrote:
>>> RMS is a pretty good database, for its time.  Alas, its become rather
>>> more dated, with an API design that is complex and limiting, and in
>>> competitive terms RMS is badly feature-limited.
>>>
>>> If you need a key-value store and where the developer entirely owns
>>> the fields used within the punched cards, and where y'all can fit your
>>> files in 2 TiB (or bound volume sets, gag), RMS is still a fine choice.
>>
>> Hoff I think you are muddying the water here.
>>
>> This discussion has so far been about ORG:SEQ files.
>>
>> ORG:IDX files are a Key Value Store. But that is a totally
>> different topic.
> 
> No, it is not.  The OP declared that RMS should be used for that.
> 
> You are correct that we're concerned about stream files, but claims 
> about RMS have been part of the discussion.

RMS is very much in scope for the discussion.

But considering files a stream of bytes and the SSIO
feature are only relevant for ORG:SEQ files.

Arne