Re: Possible bridges between OO programming proponents and relational model
Date: 3 Jun 2006 08:49:47 -0700
> <<Okay; you're discussing the physical layer here. (Although your
> parenthetical remark is incorrect; the choice of a particular
> implementation strategy isn't what determines whether
> you have independence or not.)>>
> You consider relvar and R-Table physical layer? Can't agree with that
> (must have missed something).
When you snip as much as you do, it is harder for me to have a dialog. You talked about physical concerns, which I pointed out, and now you say you weren't discussing physical concerns, but you've snipped the paragraph I was responding to, which discussed implementation and physical concerns.
> << No, I don't think that's correct at all. Physical memory is
> Please explain your point.
If by "bidimensional" you mean that SQL is always implemented as a simple row store, this is not correct. There are products that are column stores. There are other hybrid approaches. It is not so simple.
> << Well, I wouldn't do that if I were you. I think your best bet is to
> study the existing literature on relational implementation.
> Read ten papers and see if you think OO has something
> useful to say.>> Thanks for the word of caution.(I appreciate) but I
> already started doing that. Diversifying sources helps too. ;)
Marshall Received on Sat Jun 03 2006 - 17:49:47 CEST