Re: A new proof of the superiority of set oriented approaches: numerical/time serie linear interpolation
From: Jon Heggland <jon.heggland_at_idi.ntnu.no>
Date: Thu, 03 May 2007 08:23:29 +0200
Message-ID: <f1bv82$7pr$1_at_orkan.itea.ntnu.no>
>
> Yes, I misspoke. A single relvar with an empty key.
>
> I have no idea what you mean by "safer".
Date: Thu, 03 May 2007 08:23:29 +0200
Message-ID: <f1bv82$7pr$1_at_orkan.itea.ntnu.no>
Bob Badour wrote:
> Jon Heggland wrote:
>
>> Bob Badour wrote: >> >>> Gene Wirchenko wrote: >>> >>>> Cimode <cimode_at_hotmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On May 2, 11:18 am, Jon Heggland <jon.heggl..._at_idi.ntnu.no> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> you could say (as D&D do) that a database is a variable---a >>>>>> dbvar---which has a db value. Which is a tuple. >>>> >>>>> Stating that a database is a relation is much safer. >>>> >>>> But likely inaccurate. It may (and probably will) consist of more >>>> than one relation. >>> >>> If one accepts the idea of relation valued attributes, then one could >>> look at the dbms as a single tuple with a 0-ary candidate key and an RVA >>> for each relvar. >> >> A single relvar, you mean? Tuples don't have keys. Is a relvar with an >> empty key safer than a tuple variable? What does "safer" mean?
>
> Yes, I misspoke. A single relvar with an empty key.
>
> I have no idea what you mean by "safer".
Cimode's word. I don't know what it means either; that's why I'm asking. I thought you might know, since your post could be interpreted as support for the position that a database is a relation/relvar, as opposed to a tuple variable.
-- JonReceived on Thu May 03 2007 - 08:23:29 CEST