Re: In an RDBMS, what does "Data" mean?

"Alfredo Novoa" <alfredo_at_ncs.es> wrote in message news:40a75492.1033926_at_news.wanadoo.es...
> On Sat, 15 May 2004 16:43:43 GMT, "mountain man"
> <hobbit_at_southern_seaweed.com.op> wrote:
>
> >There are 3 software environments:
> >E1 = Operating system and network os layer
> >E2 = RDBMS layer
> >E3 = application layer
>
> >The RM does not reflect the actuality of the above, nor
> >make any provision for the management of the E3 layer
> >because it is not yet completely evolved.
>
> No, the application layer is what must be adapted to the RM and not
> the contrary. What is not evolved is the application layer.

Demonstrated here is the entire application layer contained in the RDBMS software. Zero apps on clients: http://www.mountainman.com.au/software/southwind

This uses stored procedures, which are DBMS objects. These objects have functional relationships to the data structures and the data structures have an evolving structure via the objects. All is heavily inter-related and unified within the database system.

But the RM in its present state cannot reference this other-side-of-the-coin object data. It should be able to in the future, perhaps.

> >The catch-cry "the RM is just as applicable to database
> >systems today, as it was in the early 1980's" should be
> >taken as an indication that something is wrong with it as
> >a pedagogic device for 2004.
>
> There are many things wrong in the application layer. For instance the
> application programming languages.
>
> >The reason for this is that E2 and E3 have changed alot
> >since 1980, particularly E2, the RDBMS software. Due
> >to the emergence of addressable stored procedures in
> >the RDBMS
>
> But complete RDBMS's still don't exist.

Machines using the basic "un-blessed" principles of the RM have only been around for 25 years. These are good enough for me, because they (especially the more recent ones) do actually incorporate *much* of the basics of the RM.

> >, there has been an effective "migration" of
> >intelligence (code) from E3 to E2.
>
> But not enough,

Then you do agree that there exists (object) "data" within the SQL DBMS's that is unable to be referenced by the relational model of "data"?

> and in the last years we are seeing a regression. A
> migration of business logic from SQL DBMS's to the crappy "Application
> Servers".

What do you think are the major elements behind this migration to these (I actually agree with your here) crappy "Apps boxes"? I used to suspect they were "caused by bad apps".

Pete Brown
Falls Creek
Oz Received on Mon May 17 2004 - 15:56:57 CEST