Re: does a table always need a PK?
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 17:01:22 -0400
Message-ID: <Y6a3b.30$tm2.5386378_at_mantis.golden.net>
"Christopher Browne" <cbbrowne_at_acm.org> wrote in message
news:bij2l3$9tgnj$3_at_ID-125932.news.uni-berlin.de...
> Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw when "Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_golden.net>
would write:
> > Even still, I find it unforgivable for someone to implement a
> > self-proclaimed rdbms and not have any familiarity with this book. It is
> > unforgivable for someone to claim an opinion on what constitutes an
rdbms
> > and not even know what 4VL is.
>
> I haven't seen any opinion being expressed, on the "MySQL side," as to
> what they think constitutes an RDBMS.
You haven't seen any opinion expressed by Heikki that MySQL constitutes an RDBMS? Or an opinion expressed by Heikki whether FirstSQL or Oracle constitutes an RDBMS? All I can suggest is to pay closer attention. Received on Wed Aug 27 2003 - 23:01:22 CEST