Re: "Correct" term for a 1:1 relationship between a "database" and an "instance" where > 1 such things are on the same physical server?

From: dana <dana_at_work_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 10:26:12 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <a38f82a2-ef71-4e65-8a32-c6d12d9d80b9_at_s15g2000yqs.googlegroups.com>

Thanks Mark, Joel, and John. I hadn't thought about non-database instances.

> Of course, if everyone says something, the language changes, regardless of whether it is stupid or counterproductive.
> The change itself can be interesting.

True. I think the Oxford English Dictionary staff changes a word's definition when a particular threshold of the new definition's occurence in print and other media has been met.

Dana Received on Thu Jul 23 2009 - 12:26:12 CDT

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: dana: "UML 2.0 for database modeling versus ER diagrams?"
Previous message: gazzag: "Re: possible nomination for oracle wtf"
Maybe in reply to: dana: ""Correct" term for a 1:1 relationship between a "database" and an "instance" where > 1 such things are on the same physical server?"
Next in thread: Mark D Powell: "Re: "Correct" term for a 1:1 relationship between a "database" and an "instance" where > 1 such things are on the same physical server?"

Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]

Original text of this message