Re: relational databases

"Alfredo Novoa" <alfredo_at_nospam_ncs.es> wrote in message news:3d021fd3.5558142_at_news.wanadoo.es...
> On Fri, 7 Jun 2002 01:40:07 -0400, "Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_golden.net>
> wrote:
>
> >A relational DBMS, or RDBMS, is a DBMS that represents all data in a
> >database as values in relations.
> >
> >A relation is approximately equivalent to the mathematical concept of
> >relation. A relation has a header consisting of a set of N named, typed
> >attributes and a body consisting of a set of N-dimensional tuples where
each
> >tuple dimension value corresponds to one of the named, typed attributes.
>
> Good definition.
>
> I only want to add that as far I know there are not any true RDBMS on
> the market.

Some are closer/truer than others. Lee Fesperman's product, FirstSQL (http://www.firstsql.com/), makes a good show by trying to implement Codd's RM/V2 with its 4 valued logic, and he has actually provided support for domains, which is a huge advance. I wish he would abandon SQL and NULL altogether, though. SQL is just too flawed a language.

I've run into the folks at alphora (http://www.alphora.com/) a couple of times now, and it looks like they are doing some very interesting stuff. Currently, they rely on an SQL dbms to act as a storage engine, though.

Chris Date and Fabian Pascal keep dropping tantalizing hints about some new technology for implementing DBMSes on Fabian's website (http://www.dbdebunk.com/), but apparently it's still under NDA. I find the hints frustrating as hell, and I hope they can start talking about it freely soon.

In short, I hope there will be a true one on the market soon! Received on Sat Jun 08 2002 - 23:43:39 CEST