Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> comp.databases.theory -> Re: separation of church and state?

Re: separation of church and state?

From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2007 11:27:14 -0300
Message-ID: <470a3e0a$0$14841$9a566e8b@news.aliant.net>


David Cressey wrote:

> "paul c" <toledobythesea_at_ooyah.ac> wrote in message
> news:1yPNi.6595$_K.6240_at_pd7urf3no...
> 

>>David Cressey wrote:
>>...
>>
>>>I think you're extrapolating Date's remarks to a point that he might not
>>>agree with. A table with an index is still a table.
>>>...
>>
>>I *suppose* it is but only in the interest of getting along with the
>>rest of the world, most of whom I think would agree with you. It's just
>>that I've never seen a formal definition of a table as a mathematical
>>object, only as a graphical analogy to a relation, without respect to an
>>algebra.
> 
> I wouldn't call a table a "graphical analogy".  I'd call it a logical data
> structure that serves to implement the storage of a relation.

If it is logical data structure, then it is an alternative to a relation, which is accurate in the context of SQL.

>>Therefore, I don't understand how dbms's manipulate tables in
>>a relational way. It seems to me that they must need to manipulate
>>relations or relation variables instead.
>
> An SQL DBMS manipulates tables, not relations or relational variables.

Exactly. Received on Mon Oct 08 2007 - 09:27:14 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US