Re: Multiple specification of constraints

From: Eric Kaun <ekaun_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 13:43:52 GMT
Message-ID: <soG1c.30938$dE7.17078@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com>

"Dawn M. Wolthuis" <dwolt_at_tincat-group.com> wrote in message news:c25kn5$dij$1_at_news.netins.net...
> If you are referring to me at the "they" I'll clarify -- the DBMS is made
up
> of at least data integrity services and CRUD services. I would never
> intentionally leave out the non-CRUD services of a DBMS (although I might
> for a "database") so my apologies if that was not clear. smiles --dawn

Oh no, it's THEM. :-)

I think the data integrity services are the more useful part - as TransRelational and multiple SQL implementations show, the persistence "layer" is pluggable and, to me at least, a solved problem (though improvements are always possible). So perhaps that shift in focus is responsible for some of the disagreements on priorities... Received on Thu Mar 04 2004 - 07:43:52 CST