Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> comp.databases.theory -> Re: relations aren't types?

Re: relations aren't types?

From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_golden.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 17:19:33 -0500
Message-ID: <NcmdnUycDZmWZ2yiRVn-hw@golden.net>


"John Jacob" <jingleheimerschmitt_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message news:72f08f6c.0312301317.25bc5538_at_posting.google.com...
> > > > The relation value in the attribute for each tuple is
> > > > a single value with defined operations. How does that differ from an
> > > > integer?
> > >
> > > Types are not atomic, values are.
> >
> > How does that answer the question about the difference between a
relation
> > value and an integer value?
>
> The point is that while both values are "atomic", from the perspective
> of the operators being invoked, that does not mean that the types are
> in the same class. They definitely are not. The type Integer is a
> scalar type, while the type of a tuple is some tuple type, a
> non-scalar type.

I have yet to see a useful definition of scalar that does not include everything one can represent in a finite number of bits.

> Yes each tuple is a single value with defined
> operations, but those operations in general require that I know the
> attributes of the tuple type. No such requirement exists for inovking
> the integer "+" operator.

"A join B" requires you know the attributes of something? What attributes must you know? Received on Tue Dec 30 2003 - 16:19:33 CST

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US