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: Normalization by Composing, not just Decomposing

Re: Normalization by Composing, not just Decomposing

From: Dawn M. Wolthuis <dwolt_at_tincat-group.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 12:23:18 -0500
Message-ID: <c5h7mm$rhi$1@news.netins.net>


"Laconic2" <laconic2_at_comcast.net> wrote in message news:7uadnZH0GZb0RebdRVn-hg_at_comcast.com...
> It's easier to form desired sets if you start with 1NF. That's why Codd
> described 1NF as "normal form".
> By "easier" I don't mean fewer machine cycles. I mean conceptually
easier.

Would it be conceptually easier to talk that way too? I would like a pizza with pepperoni on it I would like a pizza with mozarella cheese on it I would like a pizza with feta cheese on it I would like a pizza with a tomato-based sauce on it I would like a pizza with a Chicago-style crust

There, I've got my talkin' normalized! We should teach children to talk this way since it is conceptually somuch easier, eh? smiles. --dawn

> Thinking in terms of sets is basic to relational transforms of data.
>
> It's easy to turn a body of data in 1NF into a hierarachical report. Even
> the Datatrieve report writer would do that, way back before there were any
> relational DBMS products on the VAX!
>
>
>
Received on Tue Apr 13 2004 - 12:23:18 CDT

Original text of this message

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