Re: So let me get this right: (Was: NFNF vs 1NF ...)

DBMS_Plumber wrote:
> Lauri Pietarinen:
>
> > Do values of sets have implicit order? I don't think so. You are
> placing a heavy burden on the system if it has to maintain order
> so as to retain identity.
>
> I ain't placin' no burden on nuthin' (particularly not elements of
> sets). I'm just describing the XML data model, and makin' the point
> that getting results in the 'right' order involves the same kind of
> complexities as eliminating duplicates from a result.
>
> If you can build an XML system that's less than within an order of
> magnitude of a SQL system, that supports the null hypothesis (it's
all
> in the implementation: not the data model). If XML turns out to be
10x
> slower, that's bad for set algebras (and XML, but I digress). If it
> is--as Alberto seems to suggest-- more than 10X faster, then that's
> evidence for set algebras.

OK, sorry. I missunderstood what you meant. I think we have covered this ground before so I'll just leave it at this...

Lauri Pietarinen Received on Fri Feb 11 2005 - 09:02:02 CET