Re: What does this NULL mean?

>> What I mean is that they don't have significant differences. The
>> catalog is a database like any other and we already have excellent
>> (theoretical) tools to manage databases.

>The significant difference is that one deals in static databases
>and the other in the dynamic change and evolution applied to
>databases as a result of application development.

Catalogs might evolve with the DBMS, so it is again the same.

>You may like to perceive database systems change management
>as a very simple issue, however I do not.

To me it is essentially the same as source code change management, but a lot less frequent.

All the schema evolution should be represented in the database log. We could to move in time to where we want and to have a perfect view of its evolution.

>It is the single most
>expensive issue in the IT management environment, once the
>scale of the system exceeds a certain "simplicity threashold".
>Expensive in terms of time and revenue.

But this would be a practical problem, and not a theoretical one.

Theoretically, it is a completely solved issue, but current tools are light years far from the theory.

I think that you want a "theory for change management with fatally flawed tools".

>The RM is powerful but restricted.
>It does not answer all questions emergent
>in the modern database systems environment

You are confusing again the RM with the current fatally flawed implementations.

Regards
  Alfredo Received on Fri Dec 16 2005 - 13:00:48 CET