Re: Why relational division is so uncommon?
From: Vadim Tropashko <vadimtro_invalid_at_yahoo.com>
Date: 26 Apr 2007 18:15:30 -0700
Message-ID: <1177636529.949486.98590_at_r35g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
Date: 26 Apr 2007 18:15:30 -0700
Message-ID: <1177636529.949486.98590_at_r35g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
On Apr 26, 3:22 pm, "V.J. Kumar" <vjkm..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Vadim Tropashko <vadimtro_inva..._at_yahoo.com> wrote innews:1177607284.813162.87940_at_t38g2000prd.googlegroups.com:
>
> > This is an interesting observation as well. Consider a medical
> > database schema:
>
> > PatientSymptom (
> > name string,
> > symptom string
> > )
>
> 'Symptom
> string' is an ugly hack to emulate relational division for the original
> table you've specified below.
I think the misunderstanding here is the "string" which is a datatype. I should have written "varchar2(100)". Ugly but not ambiguous. Received on Fri Apr 27 2007 - 03:15:30 CEST