Re: Relational Databases and Their Guts
Date: 22 Jun 2003 04:55:36 -0700
Message-ID: <af3d9224.0306220355.590f7178_at_posting.google.com>
> Create Table does not fail the information rule--SQL does. SQL does not
> require at least one candidate key for every table. SQL allows null markers.
> As a result, SQL does not represent all information as values in relations.
> Producing a better product won't do me any good if the widespread ignorance
> in the marketplace prevents adequate demand from developing.
To recap: The IT sector is full of ignorant people that do not even know that SQL Server sucks.
> Your goals are diametrically opposed to better systems. Your product idea
> regresses to a situation we abandoned as ineffective more than three decades
> ago. We abandoned application specific databases for systems that manage
> data for all applications.
To recap: The IT sector is full of capable people that are able to tailor a general purpose tool exactly to each customer's needs.
> As I said, you are an imbecile.
Looks like you just communicated yourself into a corner. The very people that you claim can support this stupid vision of a single database for everything have yet to figure out that the most popular database management systems that call themselves relational but really are not.
IT is completely different today than it was 30 years ago. It's a lot bigger. It's more complex. Everything can actually talk to everything else. You don't need to have a single database for everything so long as you make it easy to wire it up to an organizations information bus. Received on Sun Jun 22 2003 - 13:55:36 CEST