Re: TRM - Morbidity has set in, or not?

From: paul c <toledobythesea_at_oohay.ac>
Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 03:03:38 GMT
Message-ID: <eGvbg.177131$WI1.155757@pd7tw2no>

J M Davitt wrote:
> Bob Badour wrote:
>

>> J M Davitt wrote:
>>
>>> Bob Badour wrote:
>>>
>>>> J M Davitt wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Keith H Duggar wrote:
>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>
>>>>> ...
>>>
>>> Yes.  A broader statement might be, "There ain't nothing the
>>> network model can do that the relational model can't do."
>>
>>
>> Exactly!

>
>
> Okay, that being said: it may be that a network model might suit
> KDs needs just fine. All else aside, they can be blazingly fast!
> I've seen them used to deliver virtual file systems in *nix
> environments and used one to implement a hardware interface device.
> (Not an ICE box, but a piece of VME hardware that looked like a
> process to a Unix kernel - but was actually a process on another
> box. Way cool.)
>
> Perhaps I should also emphasize: they can be incredibly difficult
> to modify. One might consider prototyping with a relational
> implementation with the intention of implementing on a network
> implementation.

I think this is a false kind of comparison. Surely the network model, if it is a logical model, is a subset of the "symmetrically exploitable" rm (if one excepts the "next"-style operators? OTOH, some relational schemas could exploit a network physical impl'n.

p Received on Fri May 19 2006 - 22:03:38 CDT