Re: SQL (was: Why using "Group By")

From: --CELKO-- <71062.1056_at_compuserve.com>
Date: 14 Mar 2003 16:35:10 -0800
Message-ID: <c0d87ec0.0303141635.612e1522_at_posting.google.com>

>>Do you have an example problem requiring recursion for which
transitive closure provides no solution? <<

The Ackermann function, for one:

 A(0, m) = m+1
 A(n+1, 0) = A(n, 1)
 A(n+1, m+1) = A(n, A(n+1, m))

Received on Sat Mar 15 2003 - 01:35:10 CET

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: --CELKO--: "Re: Extending my question. Was: The relational model and relational algebra - why did SQL become the industry standard?"
Previous message: Undercover Elephant: "CFP: XML Database Symposium at VLDB 2003"
Maybe in reply to: Mikito Harakiri: "SQL (was: Why using "Group By")"
In reply to Bob Badour: "Re: SQL (was: Why using "Group By")"
Next in thread: --CELKO--: "Re: Extending my question. Was: The relational model and relational algebra - why did SQL become the industry standard?"

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

Original text of this message