Re: Poll: What percentage advantage are RDBMS vendors taking of the RM?

From: Gene Wirchenko <genew_at_ucantrade.com.NOTHERE>
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2005 10:04:27 -0700
Message-ID: <2h8ea1tua84rv6fioscsvhsc811p7d1e5s@4ax.com>

On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 16:43:32 +0100, Paul <paul_at_test.com> wrote:

[snip]

>Well here's a list of Codd's 12 rules, which are general guidelines for
>a DBMS to be thought of as relational:
>
>http://www.wildewood.co.uk/comp/more/codds_rules.html
>
>I'd say most SQL-DBMSs are inspired by this, although some of the rules
>clearly aren't followed. But we're getting there slowly.

I really wonder about that. The XML bandwagon is one of my concerns.

>It's easy to criticise DBMS designers for not building a
>fully-relational product, but I think the practical problems are bigger
>than we might think. It's a serious level of abstraction, especially
>when you consider that many DBMSs were started years ago when computer
>were many orders of magnitude less powerful than they are today.

You mean when computers were used in the effort to send men to the moon?

>I'll give them 8 out of 10 for effort. :)

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko Received on Wed Jun 08 2005 - 12:04:27 CDT