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: Another Pizza Question

Re: Another Pizza Question

From: Timothy J. Bruce <uniblab_at_hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 03:43:24 GMT
Message-ID: <wr2fc.1000$17.90743@news1.epix.net>

> When lacking a logical argument, resort to name-calling, Mr. Bruce?
I simply assert `2 plus 2 must equal 4'; even in usenet.

> The Beatles were John, George, Paul, and Ringo
> Pete Best became a Beatle in 1960

What about Stu Cook?!?!?!?
And Pete Best was far from logical. When was the last time we read about the great works of the logician Pete Best? At least Ringo had a gig with Tommy The Tank Engine before George Carlin stole his flow...

Now if we really wanted to talk about The Fab Six (or The Fab Five, as you like to call it) we would structure our database to include temporal information.
We might have a relation storing AllPeopeInTheUniverse and then via a one-to-zero-or-more foreign-key create a subset of AllPeopeInTheUniverse and call them Musicians. A peer of Musicians might be Bands, and we would intersect Musicians with Bands as the Members relation which would not only store who was in what, but also recording when they were in what, which (hopefully) would rectify your woefully inadequate challenge. Hint: only offer challenges on domains you are competent in. (http://www.apa.org/journals/psp/psp7761121.html)

> Is it relevant that these are in two different propositions?
Swing and *wiff* miss.

> Is it relevant that these are in two different propositions? Is the
> ordering of the names of the Beatles relevant (and if you suggest that
it is
> not relevant that Ringo is last, then I'll figure it is a losing
> proposition, so to speak). I'd suggest that once you normalize this
data
> and ignore the ordering (cause it isn't so important data-wise, right?)
that
> you will have pickled this cucumber and will have lost the cucumber in
the
> process (unpickling is not an option). I think the more valid argument
is
> that we only cared about having a pickle in the first place and being
able
> to retrieve the cucumber gives us no added advantage in meeting our
goals
> (although I'd still say that if we can keep such possibly extraneous
> information without losing our goals, so much the better).
*sigh*
If ordering is important then that data needs to be recorded as an ATTRIBUTE. Niether MS SQL, Oracle, MySQL, nor The Third Manifesto make any attempt to describe or prescribe tuple order. We can chalk that one up to Man's Intuition (oh touché!).

> Ah, but we are talking about the data model and not a 3GL.
Swiiiinnng batter-batter-batter-SWING!
Your language is broken if it violates the very Set Theory and Predicate logic it is allegedly founded on.

I'll stop by around eight with some booze and KY, Timothy J. Bruce
uniblab_at_hotmail.com
</RANT> Received on Tue Apr 13 2004 - 22:43:24 CDT

Original text of this message

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