Re: Relational Databases and Their Guts
From: daveb <davebestOBVIOUS_at_usa.net>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 11:19:53 -0700
Message-ID: <tHGdndp1Dv1UemSjXTWc-w_at_speakeasy.net>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 11:19:53 -0700
Message-ID: <tHGdndp1Dv1UemSjXTWc-w_at_speakeasy.net>
"Paul Vernon" <paul.vernon_at_ukk.ibmm.comm> wrote in message
news:bdbs2l$1l6u$1_at_gazette.almaden.ibm.com...
> "base relations" are in the eye of the beholder.
>
> Logically, all equivalent schemas are equal, there is no requirement to
make
> one more equal than the others by making it 'primary'. Other than each
user
> choosing one as their current schema that is.
>
> Physically, one schema will be picked as the basis for physical
> implementation. This schema can be called "base" if you wish, but users
should
> not care.
Hm, almost feels like posreps but applied to the domain of schemas.
-- David Best (Remove the obvious to reply)Received on Wed Jun 25 2003 - 20:19:53 CEST