Re: I think that relational DBs are dead. See link to my article inside

Dmitry Shuklin wrote:
> Hi Cimode
>
> > What exactly is the purpose of your revolutionnary technology?
>
> Primary purpose - modeling neural system with up to 2000000000 neurons.
> 1 neuron == 1 object instance.
So you are saying that a specific implementation is the end of a entire logical model based on applied mathematics (as a reminder, some people have worked for more than 40 years onto creating RM). Don't you think this is hasty?

> > What kind of complexity is your technology able to handle when it comes
> > to data types?
A data type for instance is integer, binary, text, anything you can think of....
Good support for data type is the ability for instance to apply specific querying operators on the data belonging to that data type. Can you create a data type *neuron* that you can manipulate at wish? for instance lets say neuron has a property *wavelength*...can you you find all neurons with specific wavelength? superior to specific wavelength? What capability of operations involving neurons can your system handle? What kind of behavior do you aim at tracking in storing neurons?

> I don't fully understand this question. I support .NET data types.
> structures, classes, inheritance, virtual methods, interfaces. I DON'T
> support delegates and events.
>
>
> > How do you derive values from domains of values in an ensemblist
> > perspective (for instance odd integers from integers)?
> I don't understand question. Do you mean domain==type? if so i support
> .NET types. i support 32 bits object identifiers. it gives 2~31 (no
> last bit) instances as theoretical limit. I supoort Int8, Int16, Int32
> and Int64. or you mean domain==System.AppDomain ? ))))
I see...
domain are RM counterpart of mathematical ensembles of values. For instance, let's say you have ensemble of values (neuron1, neuron2, neuron3, neuron4, neuron5). Can you define a data type involving only (neuron2, neuron4, neuron5) ? How? When(at execution time? compile time?)

> WBR,
> Dmitry
Received on Tue Jul 04 2006 - 10:10:26 CEST