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: David Portas <REMOVE_BEFORE_REPLYING_dportas_at_acm.org>
Date: 13 Apr 2006 14:38:07 -0700
Message-ID: <1144964287.751761.20110@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>


Neo wrote:

>

> Hmm. Interesting. My engineering background may have influenced my
> terminology. With respect to RMDBs, I use the term schema to mean the
> overall db structure that allows one to store data for a particular
> application. The main components of the structure being tables, fields,
> field types and the relationship between keys. When printed out from
> SQL Server or Access on a size E sheet via a plotter, some of my past
> projects displayed as many as 50 or 60 vertical rectangular blocks, the
> top of each labeled with the table name, listed within the box are the
> field names and crisscrossing lines connect the primary/foreign keys of
> various tables. Little icons on the diagonal lines indicate the
> relationship type (one-to-one, one-to-many). This sheet gets spreadout
> on the conference table at various meeting through out the project's
> life so that all the developers are on the same track. It the large
> sheet that typically hung behind me from the top of the cubicle divider
> to the floor and ended up with bloody marks from various color markers
> as the project progresses. If there is a more appropriate term, please
> advise.

LOL. Now we know why you think schema changes are a problem!

-- 
David Portas
Received on Thu Apr 13 2006 - 16:38:07 CDT

Original text of this message

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