Re: The horse race

From: Bob Hairgrove <invalid_at_bigfoot.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 10:56:13 +0100
Message-ID: <4golv11nm3v1v372jg2338vorabta7r7vf_at_4ax.com>


On Mon, 20 Feb 2006 17:37:04 -0800, Mark Johnson <102334.12_at_compuserve.com> wrote:

>If one were to bet on the horses, a database could be used to store
>such information, quantitative, even vague and cryptic observations of
>use only to the diarist, if you will.
>
>Perhaps one could turn to the RM. One might list the horses by stable.
>One might list the horse, per race, and gate. The gate becomes merely
>an attribute for that relation.
>
>But how far does one carry that? Horses are money-winners. Some win
>more, some less. And they can be ranked. Their ranking is yet another
>attribute, in another relation. At what point can one say that the
>relation is sorted, which is a violation of the RM, as I understand
>it?

What do you mean by "how far does one carry that"? All your examples are typical of cursors, not relations. Every time you say "list", think "cursor". Cursors are always sorted, but relations are not.

So the question is, what do you want to model? Do you want to model horses, a schedule of races, or collect statistics on races and horses? Design your tables according to the model, not the presentation or view of the model.

--
Bob Hairgrove
NoSpamPlease_at_Home.com
Received on Tue Feb 21 2006 - 10:56:13 CET

Original text of this message