Re: Announcing New Blog

"dawn" <dawnwolthuis_at_gmail.com> wrote in message news:1137039711.753911.222510_at_g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> mountain man wrote:
>> "mAsterdam" <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org> wrote in message
>> news:43c59fa2$0$11068$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl...
>> > mountain man wrote:
>> >> dawn wrote:
>> >>>See http://www.tincat-group.com/mewsings
>> >>>Leave a comment :
>> >>
>> >> My impression of Codd was that he preferred to avoid the
>> >> complexification
>> >> via normalisation, as outlined in an article by Gittens earlier
>> >> referenced
>> >> ("A Codd inspired ..."
>> >>
>> >> OTOH my impression of Date is that he prefers to promote
>> >> complexification via normalisation.
>> >
>> > I read some books and attended some lectures by Chris Date.
>> > He doesn't shy away from difficult subjects.
>> > Could that be the trigger your impression?
>>
>> No, there are more difficult subjects that he avoids,
>
> To be fair, we each have subjects that are not our bailiwick, even
> within broader areas of expertise.

Date's publications are regarded as university level educational material for database systems. As such, I see that he some form of obligation to stay in touch with reality.

>> such
>> as schema evolution theory,
>
> While I don't fault him for ignoring or underestimating some subjects,
> I would say that a person's opinions about how to model data can be
> flawed because they do not take some important things, such as schema
> evolution, into account.

Database systems is an evolving environment. Date's pedagogy on the RM is not.
It has been static for nigh on 30 years.

>> and omits others entirely,
>> such as any formalised theoretical interface to the software
>> side of the (data/software) coin. (eg: stored procs).
>
> I agree that marginalizing either of these topics has implications and
> Date's writings sometimes favor "data in a vacuum" thinking.
>
>> > Could you provide some examples?
>>
>> Normalisation of tables in order to pedantically avoid
>> the use of nulls as though they were some form of an
>> alien life form.
>
> They are a shame, but if using SQL it is just a game and not highly
> practical to eliminate nulls. I understand going out of your way to be
> able to use a 2VL, but reworking the database schema repeatedly just to
> avoid the introduction of nulls seems silly at best and could be both
> risky and costly.

And counter-productive.

>> Date approaches complexity ad nauseum
>> but offers no simple solutions, and cannot, because of
>> his data centric view of a data _processing_ environment.
>
> I agree but still like to read what he writes. Cheers! --dawn

Why? After a certain stage, it is mainly repetition.

-- 
Pete Brown
www.mountainman.com.au