Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> comp.databases.theory -> Fraud Number 3: U-Gene

Fraud Number 3: U-Gene

From: Cimode <cimode_at_hotmail.com>
Date: 17 Jun 2006 13:06:54 -0700
Message-ID: <1150574814.211051.311310@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>


As BB's idiots keep diverting debate to my person, instead of adressing

RM issues I pointed out...I will begin quoting some of their posts to demonstrate their incoherence, ignorance or both...I will let the people judge for themselves...



BEGIN

U-Gene
//Two relations (relvalues) exists. These relations have different
headers (schemas). Are these relvalues the values of different types?

OK this one's funny...and presents so many confusions I can't count...

This ignorant trully believes that relations = relvalues and asks whether these values have different types thanks to the previous assumption if the relation have different schemas??

SO I tried pointing that out to him...

//Me//

Your question is confusing...
when you ask ...
<<Two relations (relvalues) exists. These relations have different headers (schemas). Are these relvalues the values of different types?

The tenure of your question seems to indicate you confuse a relvar and its projection as a table....These are 2 different concepts...

..relvars do not have header..header is associated to a projection as a

human need for interpretation. only the body of the table represents a

projection of a relvar...
a relvar can define a type only if it has set of operators associated to it...(see data type definitions). In case the operators and other data type prereq are defined... 2 different relvars are necessarily are

possibly defining 2 separate types.

BUT as usual, ignorants persist and sign (always funny seeing them being so sure;))

//U-Gene//

Do you understand the differense between relvalues (I asked about) and relvar(iables) ? --> This ignorant actually truly believes he can educate me

//Me// --> gave some extra shot to help him make some sense out of
it...Using sound proofs...I demonstrated his nonsense just demonstrating the consequence if==of confusing relvalue and relations...

Given the level of confusion your question implies, I do not believe you are not a position to test my knowledge of difference between relvar and relvalue...

While I had a doubt you meant *relvar* for *relavlue* as a TYPO which would have has sense, I now clearly see you have no clue about what a relation is...Confusing a relvalue, a relation and its projection as table...

Here's the proof...

You state...
<<Two relations (relvalues) exists.>>
Your question implies relations = relvalues...which if I follow this false premise reasonning would lead to relations that have similar relvalues being equal which is totally false...2 relvar with same relvalues are NOT necessarily equal.

<<These relations have different
headers (schemas). Are these relvalues the values of different >> This question is totally irrelevant if you consider a relation as being

equal to a relvalue...

I rest my case...and let people judge from themselves.... Received on Sat Jun 17 2006 - 15:06:54 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US