Re: MV counterexample

From: x <x-false_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 6 May 2004 15:38:56 +0300
Message-ID: <409a3121_at_post.usenet.com>


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

"Karel Miklav" <karel_at_inetis.spppambait.com> wrote in message news:c7d7ae0erm_at_enews4.newsguy.com...
> x wrote:

> >>So you say that each "atomic" piece of data is (should be) self
contained?

> There is no structure and it implies atomicity too, but for practical
> purposes we can't escape the realities of bits and integers and
> constraints of our projects.

> >>Is this possible ? Wouldn't we end up with one big chunk of data ?
>
> You mean, like it's in our (head)?

I don't know how data is in your head.
I mean like in a hexadecimal dump of a computer memory.

> >>Or do you argue that all integrity constraints should belong to user
space
> >>(in the user schema or in the user application) ?
>
> Multiple constraints are pain in the ass, as I gave a hint in the
> original post, but can't even help myself around this.

Aren't the constraints the ones that define the structure of data ?

> > Or something like this:
> > Data is only data. Meaning of data is not data.
> > Computers are very good at storing data.
> > Humans are better than computers at interpreting data.
> > So all we need is to let humans and computers do what they are good at.
>
> I meant data as the word is known in the IT community not as an object
> of a philosophical diatribe. Every operation in the computer is an
> interpretation of it's current internal state, so what am I supposed to
say?

You aren't SUPPOSED to say anything.

I also meant data as the data in the computer. But you said it has no structure in the computer and the structure is in our head.
I have not said that computers cannot interpret the data. You said something like "Each head has its own opinion". I only asked where do you think is the place for integrity contraints [checking].
Sorry if it sounded philosophical.

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

  • Usenet.com - The #1 Usenet Newsgroup Service on The Planet! *** http://www.usenet.com Unlimited Download - 19 Seperate Servers - 90,000 groups - Uncensored -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Received on Thu May 06 2004 - 14:38:56 CEST

Original text of this message