Re: Dreaming About Redesigning SQL

"Anthony W. Youngman" <thewolery_at_nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:yzzLHJAS9Yl$EwIB_at_thewolery.demon.co.uk...
> I just feel that as a *mathematical* *theory*,
> any attempt to enforce it is likely to be counter-productive, because
> the real world is not a theory ...

This is probably a bit philosophical, but I disagree.

If a theory does not reflect the 'real world' then that theory is broken.

[snip]
> >Now, I might be generous and say that the above is predicated on the
> >assumption of data independence - the idea that the physical layout to
store
> >the data be separated from the abstract representation that user use to
> >view, create, query and modify that data. So if don't believe in this
> >principle (which I suspect you don't) then I guess we will struggle to
> >convince you of the essentiality of the relational model.
>
> Yes - I most definitely DON'T believe in that.

Cool. We make progress. You don't believe in physical data independence. Maybe you should therefore show you understand the benefits of data independence and show how they are not really so beneficial in your opinion. Otherwise I'll assume you don't understand the benefits and stop the conversation here.

> You notice I gave Lauri a
> formula to calculate how long a query would take. I don't think he
> succeeded in convincing me he could reciprocate in kind (I've still to
> study his answer), and

> proving that a query will complete in finite time
> is of no use if "finite time" equals "longer than I can wait".

Agreed.

[snip]
> Actually, I would contend that the MV model gives you exactly what you
> are looking for here - execution time IS proportional to complexity. We
> do expose the theoretical to the physical, and the "cost in lack of
> generality" is negligible.

You don't know the power of full generality. Nothing existing begins to approach it, so loosing it is not such a loss to SQL or MV. Loosing it from relational would be a whole other deal.

> >Regards
> >Paul Vernon
> >Business Intelligence, IBM Global Services
> >
> You work for IBM - why don't you investigate IBM's own MV products,
> namely UniVerse and UniData (collectively known as U2). Maybe we'll
> convert you :-)

I read the white paper - I remember laughing.

Regards
Paul Vernon
Business Intelligence, IBM Global Services Received on Wed Oct 22 2003 - 14:58:26 CEST