Re: WWW/Internet 2009: 2nd CFP until 21 September

From: Mr. Scott <do_not_reply_at_noone.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:08:58 -0400
Message-ID: <prCdnYdAv8oGxB7XnZ2dnUVZ_qCdnZ2d_at_giganews.com>


"Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:4a82e4c7$0$23778$9a566e8b_at_news.aliant.net...
> paul c wrote:
>
>> Mr. Scott wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>> I'm confused. What requirement are you referring to? Are you referring
>>> to the requirement that nulls be eliminated or the fact that an order
>>> isn't an order without a delivery destination? The referential cycle
>>> was a consequence of trying to eliminate nulls. ...
>
> What cycle? And why would anyone care about a referential cycle? It's not
> like SQL hasn't had deferred checking for a decade or two.

I think it's misleading to say that Sql has deferred checking. Both deferred constraints and subquery in check are optional features of the Sql standard. Neither Sql Server or DB2 support either. Oracle does support deferred constraint checking but not subqueries in check.

>
>> I meant the requirement that a delivery address can't be recorded without
>> an order date.
>
> Paul,
>
> If you are going to engage these folks, please address the most glaring
> problems in their positions and ignore the inconsequential details.
Received on Wed Aug 12 2009 - 19:08:58 CDT

Original text of this message