Re: Domain Support (was: S.O.D.A. database Query API - call for comments)

Richard A. Schulman wrote:
>
> Lee Fesperman:
>
> >...In FirstSQL/J, we don't want the member B in
> >object A to change when the separately referenced
> >object B is changed. Linking of entities is
> >through relational techniques. Navigating through
> >member references in objects adds unneeded
> >complexity to a query language.
> >
> >You see we are working towards evolving database,
> >within a relational framework.
>
> 1. Do you regard the approach sketched above as a faithful
> implementation of "Domains as Extended Data Type," as
> described by Codd in _The Relational Model for Database
> Management, Version 2_, chapter 3?

No, we don't. Our intention is to provide full relational domain support through this facility, however the first release will not have full capabilities.

> 2. Would Codd?

Not at this time, and we don't know if he will approve of the full facility.

> 3. Has Codd had anything to say about other current and
> projected object-relational database products?

Dunno.

> 4. Will First/SQL differ in intended object-relational
> implementation from existing products such as DB2-UDB,
> Oracle, and Cloudscape? If so, how?

While there are a number of common aspects in the approaches, compatibility with the others is not a priority. We see it as a domain, stored procedure, trigger facility. The facilities are also useful for building client-specific (business) objects from queries on the server.

-- 
Lee Fesperman, FFE Software, Inc. (http://www.firstsql.com)
===================================================================
* Check out Database Debunkings (http://www.firstsql.com/dbdebunk/)
* "The Forum Where Database Matters Are Set Straight"