Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> comp.databases.theory -> Re: Multiplicity, Change and MV

Re: Multiplicity, Change and MV

From: Neo <neo55592_at_hotmail.com>
Date: 12 Apr 2006 07:08:16 -0700
Message-ID: <1144850896.174209.247830@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>


> This difficulty has been long recognized as a consequence of the
> EAR approach to database design. Since Chen's first paper, it's
> been apparent that neither "entity" nor "relationship" were
> fundamental concepts.

I have been referring to that fundamental concept as a "thing" in the most general sense (which has provided c.d.t. members with an endless sources of ridicule for years).

> The most resilient designs are those which accurately represent
> data, not relationships. In that vein, I've found Halpern's ORM
> approach to be helpful -- although his goal of discovering objects
> is, I feel, slightly off the mark.

Would you (or someone) be willing to demonstrate this resiliency starting with the OP's simple example and then extending a bit further? Received on Wed Apr 12 2006 - 09:08:16 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US