On Aug 21, 5:49 pm, Tegiri Nenashi <TegiriNena..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Aug 21, 8:21 am, Rob <rmpsf..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In short, there is no known "clean, efficient way to store this
> > information" in the relational model that satisfies all constraints.
> > If you have a highly restricted universe (no divorce or remarriage),
> > you might be able to solve your representation problem relationally.
>
> There are 2 relations, which can be organized as trees:
>
> Biological_Mother( parent, child )
> Biological_Father( parent, child )
>
> That is all to it. You can derive siblings informations from these
> base tables. You can introduce extra relations, like
>
> Marriage( individual1, individual2 )
>
> but the assertion that "no known clean, efficient way to store this
> information in the relational model" is clearly BS.
Aye, if it can be stated as a proposition, it can be stored in a
relational database. However, I think we might concede that the
variations in recursive querying between different RDBMS
implementations (and the non-existence of such a mechanism in some)
can be a hindrance.
Received on Tue Aug 21 2007 - 17:23:02 CDT
