Re: On what OLAP can and what OLAP can't - A little problem

Johnny wrote:

>>Johnny wrote:
>>
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>>Classical REAL WORLD vs THEORY
>>>>argument...(heard that a zillion times) Practice
>>>>guided by ignorance leads to one thing and one thing
>>>>only which is failure of systems. It is because
>>>>ignorants like you design systems that we have to do
>>>
>>>compromises... Can you point me to some examples of your
>>>production databases where ignorants haven't bastardized
>>> your solution? Do ignorants include Oracle, IBM, etc?
>>
>>Typical idiot who can't think out of a product approach...
>>SQL, ORACLE, DB2 are nothing but poor implementations of
>>sound concepts...They are nt even relational DBMS's. If
>>you were not such a moron you would know that before
>>asking such idiotic question and hope some answer...
>>

> 
> Actually I was hoping that there would be some relevance to
> the theory proposed here to actual work that I have to put
> into production.  Many of the posts on surrogate keys and
> other topics I have found helpful in designing logical
> solutions.  If nothing you propose can be used in a common
> commerical database product then I guess I am a moron for
> bothering you.  Accept my apologies.

You keep cutting out the attributions. It looks like you are baiting Cimode, though. He's a crank. You can safely ignore him. Received on Thu Sep 14 2006 - 02:28:24 CEST