Re: Possible bridges between OO programming proponents and relational model

From: J M Davitt <>
Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2006 20:36:28 GMT
Message-ID: <gpmgg.47066$>

Cimode wrote:
> <<I am not certain I agree with that last sentence.>>Can you ellaborate
> on that? What
> do you have in mind?
> <<That's a different issue.>>You really think so? I would argue that
> it is too closely related to to be ignored.
> <<However, that does not change the degree of a table and
> does not change the fact that the degree is a direct measure of the
> dimensions.>> Yes. So. I have never denied that. This is why I
> made a distinction between SQL tables as they are implemented and SQL
> tables as they should be represented. Do you have any idea onto how an
> in memory SQL table footprint looks like on current SQL DBMS?

Clarification please: are you saying that direct image implementations are two dimensional because all the columns are adjacent to each other in a row? (If so, you're writing a very different language than the readers of your posts are reading.)

[snip] Received on Sat Jun 03 2006 - 22:36:28 CEST

Original text of this message