Lauri Pietarinen wrote:
>
>One further observation came to mind:
>
>With the bag-representation you just mentioned it is possible to
>remove the duplicates, or reduce the number of them just by
>"updating" the counter. This is not possible in SQL (without
>some internal rowid).
>
>So would it be fair to say that SQL does not even really adher to
>a bag-model?
If you mean that as a bag calculus it has some very obvious short-comings
and cannot even express certain things that can be expressed with SQL if you
simulate the bags with sets of element-cardinality pairs, then, yes, you
are right.
Received on Fri Nov 15 2002 - 06:50:36 CST
