Re: Logical equivalence of simple and complex types under the relational model?
From: Paul <paul_at_test.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 22:58:41 +0000
Message-ID: <41ae4ca1$0$29738$ed2e19e4_at_ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net>
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 22:58:41 +0000
Message-ID: <41ae4ca1$0$29738$ed2e19e4_at_ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net>
>>>I am not sure that the split between complex and simple is well defined >>>atall. >> >>It is not well defined at all.
I see it as almost a trivial definition.
> Which makes it difficult for me to understand Codd' s statement
>
> "A domain is simple if all its components are atomic (nondecomposable by the
> database system."
>
> and the requirement that all domains be simple,
>
> When this requirement does not seem amount to anything even within one
> model.
Paul. Received on Wed Dec 01 2004 - 23:58:41 CET