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

From: mAsterdam <>
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 11:13:58 +0200
Message-ID: <40d5557f$0$43451$>

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
>>>  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
>> 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.

> 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

Original text of this message