This kind of throws a new spin on things...
SAP/DB has an interesting repeting history of "failure -> new name". This is I think the third or forth iteration. My take is that SAP jsut wanted to get rid of it (let someone else kill it).
The longer I am in this industry, I notice that you just have to learn new names - the rest is nearly the same.
Hello, do you mean failure from a technical or a business point of view? The "core" of SAP-DB should be Adabas which is said to be a good engine. OTOH people seem to be very reluctant to use it, and what I've seen so far, the mental gap to the mainframe-like administration tools don't seem to appeal to the average user of a Unix box.