Re: Would you like to get practical experience with a DBMS of a new generation?
From: Hiran Chaudhuri <Hiran.Chaudhuri_at_lrz.fh-muenchen.de>
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:16:28 +0100
Message-ID: <bti3rl$1o0$1_at_wsc10.lrz-muenchen.de>
> fields' if you call it so. What's
> with non relational structures.
>
> It looks very worthwhile at first glance and you are right that there are
> many on this list that defend the relational model with religious zeal.
> Don't worry if you even get called "stupid" or an "idiot" as there are
> others on this list that resort to completely illogical methods
> (intimidation, for example) to counter anything that is not based on
> relational theory. From my initial perspective, you appear to be on the
> right path. Keep movin' Cheers! --dawn
> P.S. I'll take a closer look later.
>
> <news:3FFB912A.F4F7602_at_unixspace.com>...
> the
> evaluation
> act
> ha ha!
>> Received on Thu Jan 08 2004 - 01:16:28 CET
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:16:28 +0100
Message-ID: <bti3rl$1o0$1_at_wsc10.lrz-muenchen.de>
It's very interesting that a DBMS is called "of a new generation" just because it can handle multi-value fields and so on. Those systems have been on the market for more than 30 years and are called post-relational (although they were there first). Have a look at Adabas.
What I'd call new generation are XML databases, the middle between relational and object oriented systems. Here quite some people have problems designing their data models since all normalisation rules seem not applicable.
Hiran
Dawn M. Wolthuis wrote:
> "Alexander Lashenko" <lashenko_at_unixspace.com> wrote in message
> news:3FFC1436.5B3189E1_at_unixspace.com...
>> What do you mean 'blunder'? ConteXt has aggregate fields or 'multi-value
> fields' if you call it so. What's
>> wrong? ConteXt is not a relational database. Probably you never had a >> deal
> with non relational structures.
>
> It looks very worthwhile at first glance and you are right that there are
> many on this list that defend the relational model with religious zeal.
> Don't worry if you even get called "stupid" or an "idiot" as there are
> others on this list that resort to completely illogical methods
> (intimidation, for example) to counter anything that is not based on
> relational theory. From my initial perspective, you appear to be on the
> right path. Keep movin' Cheers! --dawn
> P.S. I'll take a closer look later.
>
>> >> Joe \"Nuke Me Xemu\" Foster wrote: >> >> > "Alexander Lashenko" <lashenko_at_unixspace.com> wrote in message
> <news:3FFB912A.F4F7602_at_unixspace.com>...
>> > >> > > Look at http://www.unixspace.com/context . >> > > There you can find information regarding DBMS ConteXt. It is an >> > > interactive DBMS with an original data model. Relational, network, >> > > object oriented a so on. The site contains a lot of theoretical >> > > information (for instance you can find here the best description of
> the
>> > > database models: http://www.unixspace.com/context/databases.html). >> > > While the theories are good, now you can even download a complete >> > > package that includes DBMS and some sample applications. The
> evaluation
>> > > version has no limitations! >> > > The Windows version has been finally completed only a few days ago >> > > and you can download it from http://www.unixspace.com/download . If >> > > you
> act
>> > > now, you can be one of the first users to get it. >> > >> > First and Second Great Blunders... Check. >> > >> > URL:http://unixspace.com/context/architecture.html >> > >> > It looks like there are also special multi-value fields, yet another >> > blunder, but it's hard to tell what with all the extraneous blather. >> > >> > DROP DBMS ConteXt; >> > >> > -- >> > Joe Foster <mailto:jlfoster%40znet.com> L. Ron Dullard
> <http://www.xenu.net/>
>> > WARNING: I cannot be held responsible for the above They're
> coming to
>> > because my cats have apparently learned to type. take me >> > away,
> ha ha!
>> Received on Thu Jan 08 2004 - 01:16:28 CET