Re: Views for denomalizing
From: Gene Wirchenko <genew_at_ucantrade.com.NOTHERE>
Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2005 09:23:12 -0800
Message-ID: <6an401dv0fq1g2jl2o2vcgod8qcd838210_at_4ax.com>
>we have opted to name the positions (e.g. LastName) rather than number them.
Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2005 09:23:12 -0800
Message-ID: <6an401dv0fq1g2jl2o2vcgod8qcd838210_at_4ax.com>
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 07:18:20 -0600, "Dawn M. Wolthuis" <dwolt_at_tincat-group.comREMOVE> wrote:
[snip]
>Is there a way to specify column ordering in a SQL table? And if there were
>a product that did so, what in having a column ordering is in violation of
>1NF? Relations, by definition in mathematics, are ordered tuples, even if
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>we have opted to name the positions (e.g. LastName) rather than number them.
No, they are not. This is to avoid the nonsense of (a,b,c) and (b,c,a) being of different types. SQL does not avoid this.
[snip]
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko Received on Thu Feb 03 2005 - 18:23:12 CET