Re: foundations of relational theory?

In article <1b0b566c.0310171433.66da7da9_at_posting.google.com>, Mike Preece <michael_at_preece.net> writes
>"Mikito Harakiri" <mikharakiri_at_iahu.com> wrote in message news:<_mWjb.18$5Q3.98@
>news.oracle.com>...
>> "Anthony W. Youngman" <thewolery_at_nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:+Z8o96BptCk$Ewj6_at_thewolery.demon.co.uk...
>> > Complex queries? I agree with you there are all sorts of queries you can
>> > run. I just don't see how relational can do it faster than Pick - in
>> > fact quite the reverse. Don't forget, Pick doesn't have an optimiser
>> > because it doesn't need one. The stats I've seen - given a known key you
>> > can retrieve ANY record from disk with on average 1.05 head movements.
>> > Bearing in mind the typical Pick record is equal to several relational
>> > rows, that's a hell of an advantage if your system is i/o bound.
>>
>> You can keep you niche. Nobody on
>> comp.databases.theory
>>
>> is interested in your head movement.
>
>Keep your hair on. comp.databases.theory is neither
>comp.databases.onlyme nor comp.databases.exceptthoseidontknowabout

Except I get the impression database theory people don't care whether their databases are practical. Provided they can prove that they will get the result they're looking for in finite time, then if that finite time is ten times the current age of the universe, that's okay :-)

Cheers,
Wol

-- 
Anthony W. Youngman - wol at thewolery dot demon dot co dot uk
Witches are curious by definition and inquisitive by nature. She moved in. "Let 
me through. I'm a nosey person.", she said, employing both elbows.
Maskerade : (c) 1995 Terry Pratchett