Re: NULLs: theoretical problems?

From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 19:57:56 -0300
Message-ID: <46ca1c31$0$4057$9a566e8b_at_news.aliant.net>


David Portas wrote:

> "Neo" <neo55592_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message 
> news:1187641160.234792.278400_at_i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> 

>>>>... NULLs ... There are better and more consistent ways
>>>>of describing missing values.
>>>
>>>Will you please elaborate on those methods you
>>>consider better and more consistent? Thank you.
>>
>>Dbd, a lightweight db that represents things by creating a network of
>>nodes (each equiv to an AND gate), has an alternative method of
>>dealing with NULLs. It is simply, don't create nodes to signify that
>>something is unknown because their absence already implies it.
>>
>>Suppose we store a person named john whose age is 30. Later, we want
>>to store a person named mary but her age is unknown. In RMDB, we can
>>1) Refuse to enter a tuple for mary.
>>2) Enter a tuple for mary but incurr a NULL for age.
>>3) Redesign schema, add table T_PersonAge, move data, update code/
>>queries, etc to avoid NULL.
>
> 4) Have the right schema to start with so that no problem arises.

But that would dampen the straw! Received on Tue Aug 21 2007 - 00:57:56 CEST

Original text of this message