Re: In an RDBMS, what does "Data" mean?
From: mAsterdam <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org>
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 11:13:58 +0200
Message-ID: <40d5557f$0$43451$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
>
> :-) I'm just so used to working in upper case within the db, that it
> makes sense to use upper case when referring to MV terms. Just like I
> always quote "table", "row", "column" etc when I'm trying to describe MV
> in relational terms. It's a convenient convention.
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 11:13:58 +0200
Message-ID: <40d5557f$0$43451$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
Anthony W. Youngman wrote:
> mAsterdam writes:
>
>>> To get the invoice data >>> LIST INVOICES BY _at_ID field-names >>> and to get a listing of what's shipped grouped by stock code >>> LIST INVOICES BY.EXP STOCK-CODE field-names. >>> In other words, I've just changed the sort criteria from the primary >>> single-valued invoice number to the multi-valued stock code, and the >>> db will chuck a different view of the data at me. >> >> The logistic manager is not iterested in INVOICES. >> Why do you bother her with INVOICES? She wants to see >> SHELVES, WAREHOUSES, ORDERQUANTITIES, PACKLISTS (just adapting >> to your shouting habit ;-)
>
> :-) I'm just so used to working in upper case within the db, that it
> makes sense to use upper case when referring to MV terms. Just like I
> always quote "table", "row", "column" etc when I'm trying to describe MV
> in relational terms. It's a convenient convention.
JUST KIDDING :-)
> As for the logistics manager, yes why should she be interested in
> invoices (apart from checking that what was billed actually arrived, or
> what was sent actually got billed). I would guess that in her STOCK file
> she will have attributes like SHELF, QUANTITY and so on. What's in stock
> is different data to what's been billed :-) so it lives in a different
> FILE :-)
That was what I hinted at / suspected. How would a MV implementation
deal with the sameness of those FILEs, the SHARING of the data between
ORDERING, STOCKING, DELIVERING and BILLING the GOODS? (auch! this hurts
my eyes :-)
Received on Sun Jun 20 2004 - 11:13:58 CEST