Re: Modelling Considered Harmful

From: Kenneth Downs <knode.wants.this_at_see.sigblock>
Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 11:44:48 -0400
Message-Id: <s67qj2-3sl.ln1@pluto.downsfam.net>

mountain man wrote:

> "Kenneth Downs" <knode.wants.this_at_see.sigblock> wrote in message
> news:jhdoj2-e16.ln1_at_pluto.downsfam.net...

>> paul c wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> In modern times, the OO programming people seem to have some claim on
>>> the word as it relates to simulation whence many of their techniques /
>>> languages sprung.  In the DB world, I'm not sure whether Codd invented
>>> the term 'data model' but he certainly exposed it, not to mention
>>> defined it.  However, he was talking about about a 'model of data', NOT
>>> a 'model of reality'.
>>
>> Codd's use of the term seems to fit well definitions 2 and 3 of model:
>>
>>>> 2. Something intended to serve, as a pattern of something to be made
>>>> 3. Anything which serves, or may serve, as an example for imitation

>
> IMO Codd was looking towards the future, to a DBMS software
> that could function in a manner intended in relation to the data it held.
> His model was implemented in 1979 and its implementation improved
> in the following decades.
>
> His model, and the RM of the data belongs to the 1970's, prior to the
> release of Oracle, and in the 1980's DB2 and SQL Server, among
> other RDBMS software.
>
> Codd's and Date's model of the data is thus antiquated, except for the
> purpose of historical reference, seeing as though it has been realised
> for over 30 years within the machinery of software (RDBMS vendors).
>
> Harmful? Yes. Database theorists and academics are having a field
> day in generating useless pedagogic literature that bears absolutely no
> reference to the technical reality and/or USE of modern RDBMS
> software.
>

<AOL>
Agreed.
</AOL>

>
>
>
> Pete Brown
> Falls Creek
> Oz
> www.mountainman.com.au

-- 
Kenneth Downs
Secure Data Software, Inc.
(Ken)nneth@(Sec)ure(Dat)a(.com)

Received on Sat Apr 23 2005 - 10:44:48 CDT