Path: dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu!spool.maxwell.syr.edu!drn.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed.news.tiscali.de!news.belwue.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!easynews.net!easynet-isham!easynet.net!feed1.news.be.easynet.net!ossa.telenet-ops.be!phobos.telenet-ops.be.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Jan Hidders <jan.hidders@REMOVETHIS.pandora.be>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (X11/20040923)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.databases.theory
Subject: Re: 1GB  Tables as Classes, or Tables as Types, and all that refuted
References: <4195d930$0$178$edfadb0f@dread11.news.tele.dk> <vOpld.28011$V41.24970@attbi_s52> <4196FB0A.4030902@earthlink.net> <9KRld.23390$J75.1263650@phobos.telenet-ops.be> <2vqqjcF2ostaaU1@uni-berlin.de> <1c92edeb.0411150636.68056982@posting.google.com> <4198c7f9.19500937@news.wanadoo.es> <419f08e6$0$292$edfadb0f@dread11.news.tele.dk> <41a1d713.7052921@news.wanadoo.es> <cnst91$vim$1@news.net.uni-c.dk> <41a3148c.3692859@news.wanadoo.es> <cnvh63$rlu$1@news.net.uni-c.dk> <d9o7q0l1aa2fronknqeis1v95sijmvn6gn@4ax.com> <41a4a824$0$228$edfadb0f@dread11.news.tele.dk> <41a4bcf4.21479484@news.wanadoo.es> <41a4d881$0$205$edfadb0f@dread11.news.tele.dk> <41a4e1b0.30883453@news.wanadoo.es> <AJ6pd.34550$0d1.1769598@phobos.telenet-ops.be> <cog8p9$anv$1@news.netins.net>
In-Reply-To: <cog8p9$anv$1@news.netins.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <f28rd.5869$C63.422961@phobos.telenet-ops.be>
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 00:15:07 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.165.229.168
X-Complaints-To: abuse@telenet.be
X-Trace: phobos.telenet-ops.be 1101860107 81.165.229.168 (Wed, 01 Dec 2004 01:15:07 MET)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 01:15:07 MET
Organization: Telenet Internet
Xref: dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu comp.databases.theory:28719

Dawn M. Wolthuis wrote:
> 
> I'm trying to catch up and thought perhaps someone could answer these two
> questions -- 
> 
> 1) Has anyone provided any better logic related to the 1GB than that
> provided by Date?  If not, I would think we could talk about this as
> intuition or hypothesis that there is a mistake rather than anything
> resembling a proof, right?

Not that I know of.

> 2) Has anyone given a good refutation that there is no Great Blunder other
> than to attack the lack of logic in the defense of the 1GB?

 From a scientific point the situation is actually very simple. The 
hypothetis predicts that you run into certain problems when you build 
DBMSs that are based on this principle. However, such databases have 
been built and the problems weren't there. Hypothesis falsified. End of 
story.

-- Jan Hidders