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

From: JXStern <>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 15:59:22 GMT
Message-ID: <>

On 12 Mar 2007 10:43:17 -0700, "Dmitry Shuklin" <> wrote:

>> That's not news, that an unconstrained description has constrained
>> grammers as a subset, that type 0 grammar has type 1,2,3 grammars as
>> "special cases", but the general case does not have some of the
>> properties of its simplified, special cases.
>Agree. But if some system allows to implement type 0 grammar then also
>it allow implement constrants and emulate type 1,2,3 grammars but not
>vice versa.

Well, I don't know.

The value of an RDBMS is that it holds ALL the data.

I'm interested in extensions to the relational model and SQL (or query language better than SQL), in the general direction of OO languges, but it is the constraint on storage and the cannonical forms that make RDBMS work, and just tacking on some swizzled spaghetti storage may have its place, but it's really mixing apples and oranges, I don't see that it enlightens either side.

J. Received on Tue Mar 13 2007 - 16:59:22 CET

Original text of this message