Re: Relational and multivalue databases

"Dawn M. Wolthuis" <dwolt_at_tincat-group.com> wrote in message news:c16cp5$ob6$1_at_news.netins.net...
> However, my experience tells me that the implementations of the relational
> model "seem to" (I admit I have no concrete proof of this) be more costly,
> without corresponding benefits, to the corporate owner.

Fair enough. I've had (and continue to have) the opposite experience, for example:
- poorly-normalized databases causing data integrity problems and query nightmares
- "normalizable" business logic stuffed into baroque procedural code - new business requirements forcing database reorganization because of poor decisions which were easy to see as such even at the time they were done

Relational, done right, would yield practical value. SQL, done as "relationally as possible", yields some practical value.

Obviously, then, our mileage varies...

> So, what is our goal in having a good theory of how to store and retrieve
> data? --dawn

Theory is fun for its own sake, but in the case of relational is also intended to help people at a practical level. Codd developed it in direct response to many, many problems with network and hierarchic databases.

• erk