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

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> comp.databases.theory -> Re: I think that relational DBs are dead. See link to my article inside

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

From: David Portas <REMOVE_BEFORE_REPLYING_dportas_at_acm.org>
Date: 18 Jul 2006 13:22:43 -0700
Message-ID: <1153254163.886257.181730@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>


Josip Almasi wrote:
>
> No, I ment relational and multidimensional model.
> While first is better for oltp and second for olap, I expect network
> model to be best for persistence (of OO apps).

What multidimensional model? Kimball popularised some methodology and some jargon under the Dimensional banner. Some people find such terminology useful but it doesn't change the data model. It is still relational or SQL. Do you think relational is something other than multi-dimensional?

> I don't really think there's some big strictly defined mathematical
> construct named 'object model', and I don't even think there's a need
> for such a thing, in fact such a construct will only limit OOP, only to
> make us find something more flexible;)

So your preferred model is no model at all. Noted.

> How does sql query for 'show all substitutes for BC108B' look like?

A recursive CTE. More generally speaking the query is just some restriction of a transitive closure (ie. it need not be defined recursively).

>
> Smells like networks are more general however. Each time we draw an ER
> diagram we prove it;)

We prove no such thing. A network can always be represented relationally by materializing some arbitrary pointers as attributes.

-- 
David Portas
Received on Tue Jul 18 2006 - 15:22:43 CDT

Original text of this message

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