Re: MV counterexample

• Post for FREE via your newsreader at post.usenet.com ****

"Karel Miklav" <karel_at_inetis.spppambait.com> wrote in message news:c7cmao02o3q_at_enews4.newsguy.com...
> my point was, there is no inherent structure in data. We treat
> characters in a string and numbers in an array like they are somehow
> connected by invisible ties which preserve their order/structure, but
> they're not, they're only conencted in our haeds. There are reasons to
> optimize, but the structure is not one of them, rather a way.

So you say that each "atomic" piece of data is (should be) self contained ? Is this possible ? Wouldn't we end up with one big chunk of data ? Or do you argue that all integrity constraints should belong to user space (in the user schema or in the user application) ?

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

• Usenet.com - The #1 Usenet Newsgroup Service on The Planet! *** http://www.usenet.com Unlimited Download - 19 Seperate Servers - 90,000 groups - Uncensored -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=