Re: An object-oriented network DBMS from relational DBMS point of view

On Mar 10, 6:15 am, "Walt" <wami..._at_verizon.net> wrote:
> "Dmitry Shuklin" <shuk..._at_bk.ru> wrote in message
>
> news:1173440677.467627.35460_at_q40g2000cwq.googlegroups.com...
>
> [snip]
>
> > Note, that the concept of references to the rows is also not new and
> > was embodied long ago in such famous RDBMS, as Oracle.
>
> [snip]
>
> It's not only not new, but also not relational.

It's not only not relational, but also not necessary.

Every relation, by definition, has a set of attributes whose values are unique, and which can therefore be used in relational expressions to uniquely identify a row. That's all you'd get out of a pointer. Further, by requiring the unnecessary pointer, you constrain implementations unnecessarily.

> Anyone relying on using a reference to a row as implicitly referencing the
> data contained in the row is suing the graph model of data, and not the
> relational model of data.

Hmmm. Various of us have pondered many different ways to help educate the programming public about the value of the relational model, but I don't think anyone has ever proposed involving the courts before. But as an American I love the idea! Let us sue other data models for false advertising.

Marshall

PS. Sorry. Received on Sat Mar 10 2007 - 16:22:31 CET