Re: Are there terms for these?

From: paul c <toledobythesea_at_oohay.ac>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 02:16:30 GMT
Message-ID: <2YuPe.306942$5V4.77459@pd7tw3no>

Kenneth Downs wrote:
> Marshall Spight wrote:
>
>

>>Kenneth Downs wrote:
>>
>>>Marshall  Spight wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Kenneth Downs wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Given two tables that are not UNION compatible, it seems there are
>>>>>ways to UNION them anyway.
>>>>>
>>>>>Method 1, Intersect their headers.  The resulting header is used to
>>>>>project
>>>>>both tables and now those projections are union compatible.  What
>>>>>would this be called?
>>>>
>>>>We've been discussing this a lot. There was even a thead I started
>>>>about
>>>>a month ago called (IIRC) What would this operator be called?
>>>
>>>This is scary, how did I miss it?
>>
>>Here it is:
>>
>>"What to call this operator?"
>>

>
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.databases.theory/browse_thread/thread/7a855309c23c73eb/1aad918848dd35fd
>
> This is very sad. I found the topic incomprehensible and was not following
> closely. Now I'll have to go back.
> ...

Hey, Marshall. Sorry, I didn't catch the question the first time. 'Meet' looks like an attractive word to me, both 'meet and proper' and reminds me of a Beatles lyric, 'come together, right now' which seems rather precise as far as computers are concerned.

pc Received on Thu Aug 25 2005 - 21:16:30 CDT