Re: Transitive Closure

From: Mikito Harakiri <mikharakiri_at_iahu.com>
Date: Fri, 14 May 2004 10:23:36 -0700
Message-ID: <3r7pc.23$7Q3.165_at_news.oracle.com>

"Alfredo Novoa" <alfredo_at_ncs.es> wrote in message news:40a4fd70.3221982_at_news.wanadoo.es...
> On 12 May 2004 11:55:22 -0700, mikharakiri_nospaum_at_yahoo.com (Mikito
> Harakiri) wrote:
>
> >Is TClose a well defined operator?
>
> Yes, but it is only defined for binary relations.

Then, it's inconvenience, at least. Trees are usually represented with relations that combine nodes and edges together, and you effectively prohibit TC working with trees.

From bigger perspective, it looks more than just a minor limitation. It's breaking relational closure. What other relational operator is not allowed to be applied to arbitrary relation? Received on Fri May 14 2004 - 19:23:36 CEST

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Alan: "Re: In an RDBMS, what does "Data" mean?"
Previous message: Mikito Harakiri: "Re: Transitive Closure"
Maybe in reply to: Mikito Harakiri: "Re: Transitive Closure"
In reply to Alfredo Novoa: "Re: Transitive Closure"
Next in thread: Vadim Tropashko: "Re: Transitive Closure"
Reply: Vadim Tropashko: "Re: Transitive Closure"
Reply: Alfredo Novoa: "Re: Transitive Closure"

Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]

Original text of this message