Re: foundations of relational theory?
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2003 09:31:03 -0400
Message-ID: <U8-dnXLiW7DE5geiU-KYgw_at_golden.net>
"Marshall Spight" <mspight_at_dnai.com> wrote in message
news:1Ypmb.23974$HS4.92369_at_attbi_s01...
> "Tony Gravagno" <g6q3x9lu53001_at_sneakemail.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:dvh0pvo70vrue56jma8gkjotmnu9gm8vtu_at_4ax.com...
> >
> >
> > This must sound horrifying to you relational guys, but again, we don't
> > view the system primarily as a database with applications supporting
> > it. We view the application as a having the database as one of its
> > components - unless the application needs a reference in the
> > dictionary it doesn't get one.
>
> Hypothesis: PICK systems work well for application development
> because of excellent application development tools and tight
> integration between the application language and the DBMS.
> Agility is enhanced by the fact that some of the more complex
> possibilities for data models, such as many-to-many relationships,
> are simply excluded. In contrast, SQL DBMSs, while having a superior
> theoretical basis and a data model that can handle arbitrarily complex
> relationships, are hampered by having no standardized application
> builders or tools. In addition, SQL is particularly hampered
> by the fact that its core data structure, the multiset, has no
> corresponding entity in popular programming languages, causing
> a huge conceptual gap, or "impedence mismatch" between DBMS
> and application languages.
>
> I'm not saying this is true or not, but it seems consistent with
> what I've read in this thread. Anyone care to critique?
>
> BTW, if my hypothesis holds, it suggests (to me, anyway)
> that the right way to respond is to try to understand the
> best of each; the benefits of RAD that come with good
> tools and integration in PICK land and the superior
> theoretic foundation that relational (the
> "inspiration for SQL" :-) has.
>
> Anyone care to critique?
The hypothesis that data dependence causes greater agility is flawed. I have established previously that logically unimportant physical changes in Pick data fundamentally alter the meaning of existing AQL queries.