Re: Why is database integrity so impopular ?

On Nov 1, 8:57 am, "Walter Mitty" <wami..._at_verizon.net> wrote:
> <patrick..._at_yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:fab13a41-6c86-45fc-9cf2-88c74e9c338a_at_i20g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > I think that relational database theory is too limitting for some
> > applications. I believe that the modern database needs to be split
> > into component parts so that not everyone has to be saddled with the
> > relational part.
>
> I think you might have meant "the relational data model" where you wrote
> "relational database theory". True?
>
> Could you give an example?
>
> If you design part of your database to be relational, and another part to be
> something else that's not conformant to relational, how do you use data
> from the two parts together in an integrated fashion? Or is that too much
> to ask?

This is probably where I proposed ditching relational theory inadvertently. I think there is a role for relational theory, just because I'm not immersed into it at the level others are doesn't mean I'm telling _them_ to ditch it.

I'm saying that I could think of cases where I would avoid relational technology for particular benefits, chiefly in terms of certain costs of running it. Received on Sat Nov 01 2008 - 18:31:09 CET