# Re: Counting propositions

From: x <x-false_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 19:57:42 +0300
Message-ID: <40d8642c_at_post.usenet.com>

"Mikito Harakiri" <mikharakiri_at_iahu.com> wrote in message news:BsZBc.19\$da4.142_at_news.oracle.com...
>
> "x" <x-false_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:40d85df1\$1_at_post.usenet.com...
> >
> >
> > "Mikito Harakiri" <mikharakiri_at_iahu.com> wrote in message
> > news:DPYBc.18\$da4.141_at_news.oracle.com...
> > >
> > > "Paul" <paul_at_test.com> wrote in message
> > > news:CFWBc.19053\$NK4.3265189_at_stones.force9.net...
> > > > Isn't "select count(*)" a similar thing? You should explicitly name
> the
> > > > data columns you want. If you change the candidate keys it may
change
> > > > the whole interpretation of the propositions. In which case it may
no
> > > > longer be true that you want to count propositions.
> > >
> > > Count is unusual aggregate operator. Every other aggregate operator is
> > > associated with a binary operation. Indeed, the SUM is iterative
> > application
> > > of "+", the MAX is iterative application of "max(x,y)" (or CASE ...).
> > There
> > > are few exceptions like AVG, but they can be viewed as redundant (or
at
> > > least less fundamental) operators.
> >
> > SUM(),MAX(),AVG() apply to a bag of values.
> >
> > > What operation COUNT is application of? The increment, of course.
Unlike
> > the
> > > examples above, the increment is unary operation, so the COUNT
shouldn't
> > > really have an argument!
> >
> > COUNT() apply to a bag of values.
>
> SUM(a,b,c,d) = ((a + b) + c) + d
>
> where brackets are inessential, as "+" is associative operators.
Therefore,
> I'm talking about expressing an operation with variable number of
arguments
> in terms of binary operation.

I understood this.
But not all bag operators can be decomposed in this way.

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

• Usenet.com - The #1 Usenet Newsgroup Service on The Planet! *** http://www.usenet.com Unlimited Download - 19 Seperate Servers - 90,000 groups - Uncensored -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Received on Tue Jun 22 2004 - 18:57:42 CEST

Original text of this message