What arguments to use to explain why a SQL DB is far better then a flat file
- by jamone
The higher ups in my company were told by good friends that flat files are the way to go, and we should switch from MS SQL server to them for everything we do. We have over 300 servers and hundreds of different databases. From just the few I'm involved with we have 10 billion records in quite a few of them with upwards of 100k new records a day and who knows how many updates... Me and a couple others need to come up with a response saying why we shouldn't do this. Most of our stuff is ASP.NET with some legacy ASP. We thought that making a simple console app that tests/times the same interactions between a flat file (stored on the network) and SQL over the network doing large inserts, searches, updates etc along with things like network disconnects randomly. This would show them how bad flat files can be espically when you are dealing with millions of records.
What things should I use in my response? What should I do with my demo code to illustrate this?
My sort list so far:
Security
Concurent access
Performance with large ammounts of data
Ammount of time to do such a massive rewrite/switch
Lack of transactions
PITA to map relational data to flat files
I fear that this will be a great post on the Daily WTF someday if I can't stop it now.
