# Re: Possible bridges between OO programming proponents and relational model

Date: 3 Jun 2006 06:53:59 -0700

Message-ID: <1149342839.300694.137380_at_i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>

Cimode wrote:

> Thank you for your feedback.

*>
**> << This does not make any sense, the dimension of a relvar is the
**> number
**> of attributes.>>Absolutely. but SQL table implementations are not
**> relvar, just a possible representation of a relvar. Commonly
**> implemented SQL DBMS Tables are bidimensional.
*

**VAR CUBE RELATION { X REAL, Y REAL, Z REAL}
**
**TABLE CUBE(X REAL, Y REAL, Z REAL)
**
What's the substantial difference with repect to 'dimensionality' ?

> <<I suppose that you know how to represent a cube with a table.>> It is

*> an analogy used for communication's sake. You misread and
**> misunderstood my comment. I said that a face of a cube is
**> bidimensional and is a comparable to what a SQL Table is to a relvar.
**> (the relvar being a 3 dimensional relvar). This analogy has been used
**> by DATE and PASCAL and I find it very valid.
*

See above, and what analogy do you have in mind ? Received on Sat Jun 03 2006 - 15:53:59 CEST