Re: WHAT vs HOW vs WHERE

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

"Brian Inglis" <Brian.Inglis_at_SystematicSw.Invalid> wrote in message news:7bbnb0tusu6uu1m7lp6elnu1q84hapa5hu_at_4ax.com...
> On Mon, 31 May 2004 17:43:01 +0300 in comp.databases.theory, "x"
> <x-false_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >**** Post for FREE via your newsreader at post.usenet.com ****
> >
> >
> >"Leandro Guimaraens Faria Corsetti Dutra" <leandro_at_dutra.fastmail.fm>
wrote
> >in message news:pan.2004.05.31.12.07.23.235040_at_dutra.fastmail.fm...
> >> Em Sat, 29 May 2004 16:58:24 +0000, Alfredo Novoa escreveu:
> >>
> >> >> Indexes are full of pointers.
> >> >
> >> > Indexes are obsolete :-)
> >>
> >> Only if and when transrelational or something the like works,
> >> AFAIU.
> >>
> >> Until them, the better point is that indexes should be hidden
> >> from the users. They are a DBA concern only.
> >>
> >
> >No. In TransRelational (TM) *all* data is indexes :-)
> >This is the trick *they* don't want you to know :-)
>
> Oh, god! Please don't tell me someone is trying to flog a product
> based on the old inverted index approach, and claim it's new?

I think it is not exactly the inverted index approach because there are no rowIDs.

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

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