Re: Lets get physical

Check this page

http://www.dbdebunk.com/page/page/1548800.htm for more info...

paul c wrote:
> 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 dbdebunk.com. 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 dbdebunk.com
> >
> > <<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
> >
> > GO FASTER! THE TRANSRELATIONAL™ APPROACH TO DBMS IMPLEMENTATION]
> >
> >> p
> >

>