Re: How would a relational operating system look like?

"Cimode" <cimode_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1181331457.491832.23120_at_p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
> On 4 juin, 19:58, "Brian Selzer" <b..._at_selzer-software.com> wrote:
>> "DBMS_Plumber" <paul_geoffrey_br..._at_yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:1180976599.740262.134510_at_k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...> On Jun 3,
>> 7:57 pm, "Brian Selzer" <b..._at_selzer-software.com> wrote:
>> >> Are domains variable in a relational operating system?
>>
>> > Brian! Think bigger, man!
>>
>> > Not only are domains extensible, but even the set of operators in the
>> > algebra!
>>
>> I'm just wondering how each and every atomic value (file) in a relational
>> operating system can be located in one and only one place so that it can
>> be
>> shared by multiple users at the same time.
>
> Atomic values are no shared by users. Atomic values are a part of
> data layer. User interact only one possible the representation of a
> tuple set. Besides, they is a long way to go before reaching the
> problem of concurrency..
>

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. A possible representation is a member of a set that maps bijectively onto a domain and corresponds to an element of that domain. No matter how many possible representations there are for an element, any invocation of such an accessor function necessarily involves the element.

> Regards...
>
Received on Sat Jun 09 2007 - 06:43:57 CEST