Re: Lets get physical

From: paul c <>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 19:27:55 GMT
Message-ID: <%wikg.35701$Mn5.12740_at_pd7tw3no>

Cimode wrote:
> paul c wrote:

>> J M Davitt wrote:
>>> Cimode wrote:
>>>> paul c wrote:
>>>>> Like some others here (as best as I can recall), I've puzzled over
>>>>> comments such as the TRM not being a physical layer.
>>>> Anybody who stated has not a clue about RM...What a stupid
>>>> comment...who advocated that?  I certainly did'nt...
>>>> ...
>> FP, I think.  Might find it at  Not sure about CJ Date.

> If you consider that FP and CJ Date think that TRM is not anything else
> than an implementation model for RM working on physical layer of
> representation you are delluding yourself. TRM defines clearly
> physical oriented concepts...
> This is from
> <<The TransRelational™ Model is an implementation approach, not a
> replacement of the relational model.>> (FP)
> <<a detailed description of all aspects of TRM, including update
> operations and databases stored on disk.>>
> If you want more information read FP paper
>> p

No time to search (also I don't think FP wrote such a paper, CJD promised a book with similar title). If it's not there it must have been in a private message.

p Received on Thu Jun 15 2006 - 21:27:55 CEST

Original text of this message