Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> comp.databases.theory -> Re: Demo: Modelling Cost of Travel Paths Between Towns

Re: Demo: Modelling Cost of Travel Paths Between Towns

From: Neo <neo55592_at_hotmail.com>
Date: 4 Dec 2004 18:02:52 -0800
Message-ID: <4b45d3ad.0412041802.3c4bb4e4@posting.google.com>


> [Neo] insistence that his model is better than everything else,

---
From thread "Object-Oriented databases Reaerch" near 4/6/04
 
Alfredo Novoa wrote "The Relational Model is not superior in a few
cases, but it is never inferior."

Neo wrote "RDM is a subset of relational algebra. RDM is optimal for
its scope. For problems outside of RDM's scope, RDM will be
inefficient and impractical. For problems that are within the scope of
models even more restricted than RDM, the restricted model will be
more efficient. Overall, RDM is well suited for many common
applications."

---
From thread "Re: Demo: Things in Hierarchies (w/o RM/SQL)" near
11/07/07

Neo wrote ".. while RM is currently the most useful/practical data
model, it is limited. TM is a more general data model and therefore is
not as efficient within RM's scope. "

Neo wrote: "A limited methodology (ie RM) will be more efficient than
a more
general methodology (ie Thing Model, the foundation for XDb1 & 2) when
both are applied to an application within the limited methodology's
scope. For years, RMers have propogated the falsity that RM is the
most general/generic methodology. I am here to prove them wrong with
examples outside RM's ideal scope."

---
From thread "Date's First Great Blunder" near 4/21/04

Neo wrote: "In general, models "match" reality within a scope. The
more
specialized a model's scope, the more efficient it is within that
scope but conversely the more miserably it fails outside of that
scope. I agree that RDM has a scope which covers many common
situations. The above example is designed to push RDM beyond its
practical scope. XDb1 (a partial implementation of TDM) has a broader
scope than RDM. Thus XDb1 is less efficient within RDM's scope."

----
From thread "A Normalization Question" near 6/8/07 and 7/26/07

Neo wrote "The relational model is fundamentally limited. Its
limitations have pluses and minus. On the plus side, it can
represent/manipulate fairly structured data (ie tables) efficiently.
On the minus side, it is either impractical or impossible to 
represent/ maniplate/ normalize some scopes of data. ... XDb's data
model (TDM) is more general than RM. On the plus side, it can
normalize any[?] data. On the minus side, it is less efficient under a
limited scope of data (ie tables). XDb1, an experimental db, is a
limited implementation of TDM and can normalize to a greater extent
than RM over certains scopes of data. XDb2, under development, is a
more complete implementation of TDM and is able to normalize nearly
all scopes of data."

Neo wrote "RM/SQL are robust tools for production environments. XDb2
is a prototype of an experimental data model. For many common
applications, RM/SQL solution will be more efficient, but there exists
some AI-type apps where XDb2 could do well."

----
From thread "object algebra" near 2/25/04

Neo wrote "Using a more general model (TM) to solve a problem will be
more difficult than using a less general model (RM), assuming the
problem
is within the less general model's scope. But when the problem begin
to exceed the simpler model's scope, it is actually easier with the
other. I am try to demonstrate this by requesting someone solve..."

Eric Kaun wrote "RDM as a general model is fine."

Neo wrote "In the overall scope of things, it is currently the best."

----
From thread "Nearest Common Ancestor Report" near 11/9/04

Neo wrote "...presently the relational model is probably the best
overall solution to many common applications."

----
From thread "Database engines as extensions to applications" near
4/7/04

Neo wrote "RDM is a subset of the expressiveness afforded by pure
relational algebra. RDM doen't have sufficient expressiveness to
implement the
higher levels of data/code structures/integration that people loosely
associate with OO. RDM is optimal for its limited scope. For problems
outside of RDM's scope, RDM will be inefficient and impractical. For
now, RDM is well suited for many common applications."

----
From thread "Relational vs network vs hierarchic databases" near
11/9/04

Neo wrote "While RM dbs do have an advantage in many common
applications presently, to those who contend that RM covers all scopes
better than the remaining, please show how to represent the below
things without NULLs and redundancy..."
Received on Sat Dec 04 2004 - 20:02:52 CST

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US