Re: RM and definition of relations/tuples
From: x <x_at_not-exists.org>
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 09:34:02 +0200
Message-ID: <dm6epf$tu7$1_at_domitilla.aioe.org>
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 09:34:02 +0200
Message-ID: <dm6epf$tu7$1_at_domitilla.aioe.org>
"vc" <boston103_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1132859897.977772.69710_at_g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> The first definition is closer to the "mathematical" relation where a
> tuple is an *ordered* sequence. The second definition is what database
> folks prefer to use (see Codd, Date, et al) where a tuple is a *set* of
> attribbute:value pairs. One can be mapped to the other and I would not
> worry too much about the difference unless you are doing some d.b.
> theoretical research.
Is this set *ordered* ?
{1,2,3,4,5,6}
Received on Fri Nov 25 2005 - 08:34:02 CET