Home -> Usenet -> comp.databases.theory -> Re: Database design, Keys and some other things

Re: Database design, Keys and some other things

From: paul c <toledobythesea_at_oohay.ac>
Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 20:00:46 GMT
Message-ID: <OVB%e.26032$oW2.21725_at_pd7tw1no> 






mAsterdam wrote:


> paul c wrote:


> 

>> mAsterdam wrote:
>>
>>> ... When designing a database, we assume a closed world for
>>> the database under design. Aren't you sugessting we
>>> work within that same specific closed world when
>>> designing it?
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>> Also that this makes the notion of "surrogate" meaningless within the 
>> CWA.




> 

> 

> Well, when you are designing that big a database,


> you are right of course. For all other databases not, though.




That reminds me of something I read: "the purpose of metaphysics is to 
correct metaphysics", which I think I can justify only by giving a 
longer reply.



I'd say the db only has to be as big as having one more attribute than 
the smallest possible db.  Would think this would include most databases.



I'm assuming that by "smallest" we mean a db that only the empty set as 
attribute even though there could be many differently-named relations 
within it.



p
Received on Sat Oct 01 2005 - 22:00:46 CEST












Original text of this message