Re: which softeware can create database?

From: Jan Hidders <>
Date: 11 Nov 2002 22:19:29 +0100
Message-ID: <3dd01ee1$>

Bob Badour wrote:
>Perhaps I missed the start of the thread, but I think you assume too much.
>I don't recall anyone demanding that anyone use RDBMS to mean anything
>other than a database management system based on relations as introduced to
>the database research community back in Codd's 1970 paper. I seem to recall
>this thread started because someone chastised another for criticizing RDBMS
>for problems caused by the non-relational aspects of SQL.

No, what started our quibble was this:

  • BEGIN QUOTE -------------------------------------- In article <apb70p$h28$>, Leandro Guimar„es Faria Corsetti Dutra <> wrote:
    >Finarfin wrote:
    >> RDBMS
    >> Oracle, MS SQL, Access, Paradox, MySQL, PostgreSQL, SAP db, MSQL, etc.
    > Wrong. These are SQL DBMSs. The only RDBMS in the market is
    >Alphora Dataphor.
  • END QUOTE --------------------------------------
I found the "Wrong" too simplistic here and that's why I reacted.

>"Relation" has a precise meaning in this context and how an SQL table or
>view differs from a relation has great significance in this context.

Sure, absolutely true, and in fact exactly what I teach my students every year. But that is not the issue here.

>I find your insistence that criticisms of the relational model are
>valid--even when founded on the non-relational properties of
>SQL--intellectually perverse.

I have never criticised the relational model because of properties of SQL. If you think I did then point me to where I did and I will clarify. If you think that any criticism on the relational model is perverse, no matter how well-founded it is, then that says probably more about your intellectual attitude than mine.

Note by the way that most of my criticism has been directed at the over-simplified arguments that are used to defend it here and the uncritical way in which Date and Darwen's views are regarded by some, and not so much at the relational model itself.

As far as my criticism on the model itself is concerned, (which is actually very little) you seem to think that this means that I'm against it or even on the side of "the likes of Carl". I hope you will realize one day that the world is a bit more complicated than that.

  • Jan Hidders
Received on Mon Nov 11 2002 - 22:19:29 CET

Original text of this message