Re: hamsterdb Transactional Storage (thanks to all of you)

From: <compdb_at_hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 21:08:16 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <3c4f1ec7-48fc-478e-92e4-8eedce901cf1_at_d9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>



On Sep 30, 1:02 am, Clifford Heath <no.s..._at_please.net> wrote:
> If we had an interface with proper nested relation (rel-valued attrs)
> support, a lot of the push to drive code into the DBMS would vanish,
> and that'd be wonderful. But for that, a new query language has to
> emerge.

??
Date and Darwen have proper nested relations. The algebra is technically speaking slightly different as whenever you have a recursively nested version of a type. To NEST is to allow relations as attribute types. UNNEST is primitive (D&D don't address this correctly). If you have a generalized aggregate corresponding to series notation you can express UNNEST as UNION over a set of tuples.

> If we had [X] a lot of the push to drive [Y] into the DBMS would vanish,
> and that'd be wonderful.

X need only be "the relational model being used". Y is "NOT X" (see "A Call to Arms" for examples).

philip Received on Wed Sep 30 2009 - 23:08:16 CDT

Original text of this message