Re: does a table always need a PK?

From: Tony Douglas <tonyisyourpal_at_netscape.net>
Date: 5 Sep 2003 03:00:48 -0700
Message-ID: <bcb8c360.0309050200.67fc3ed0_at_posting.google.com>


"Paul Vernon" <paul.vernon_at_ukk.ibmm.comm> wrote in message news:<bj2mt3$1174$1_at_gazette.almaden.ibm.com>...

Hi Paul,

> I doubt that lambda calculus is the correct level of abstraction here. Concepts such
> as risk, financial cost etc don't mean much at that level. Not everything can be
> understood at the same level of abstraction.
>
I think we kind-of in agreement on this; Heikki was asking for a formal, mathematical specification of what a database *management system* was, and I was arguing that while a formal specification of such things as concurrency (which aren't part of the relational model) could be achieved, there were a whole host of other issues that weren't really amenable to that sort of analysis. Maybe not terribly well, I'll grant you... :)

  • Tony
Received on Fri Sep 05 2003 - 12:00:48 CEST

Original text of this message