Re: Does Codd's view of a relational database differ from that ofDate& Darwin? [M.Gittens]

From: Alfredo Novoa <alfredo_novoa_at_hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2005 16:19:18 +0200
Message-ID: <5qm8a19q4nb9avbmhrik5nj5u35vujspsj@4ax.com>

On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 14:48:35 +0100, Paul <paul_at_test.com> wrote:

>I guess the other claim against NULLs is that they make things more
>complex and less intuitive, which is a more subjective point. You could
>argue that Darwen's method of avoiding NULLs is more complex that using
>NULLs in the first place.

Nulls undermine the conceptual integrity of the Relational Model which is based in predicate logic.

A tuple with nulls does not match to a logical proposition.

This causes many problems. Some of them were pointed by Eric.

Regards Received on Mon Jun 06 2005 - 09:19:18 CDT

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: paul c: "Re: Poll: What percentage advantage are RDBMS vendors taking of the RM?"
Previous message: Alfredo Novoa: "Re: Translating constraints to RM Terms"
In reply to: Paul: "Re: Does Codd's view of a relational database differ from that ofDate& Darwin? [M.Gittens]"
Next in thread: paul c: "Re: Does Codd's view of a relational database differ from that ofDate& Darwin? [M.Gittens]"
Reply: paul c: "Re: Does Codd's view of a relational database differ from that ofDate& Darwin? [M.Gittens]"
Reply: Paul: "Re: Does Codd's view of a relational database differ from that ofDate& Darwin? [M.Gittens]"

Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]

Original text of this message

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