Re: does a table always need a PK?

From: Jonathan Leffler <jleffler_at_earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 04:31:08 GMT
Message-ID: <g2V4b.6089$Lk5.1952_at_newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>

Bob Badour wrote:
> "Morten Gulbrandsen" <Morten.Gulbrandsen_at_rwth-aachen.de> wrote:

>>Then I'd like to investigate  D&D's _TTM_, whatever it is.

>
>
> D&D are C.J. Date and Hugh Darwen. _TTM_ is an acronym for "The Third
> Manifesto" or more completely: _Foundation for Object/Relational Databases,
> The Third Manifesto_

That's the first edition; the second edition has a different title:

Foundation for Future Database Systems: The Third Manifesto.

The content of the second edition, mainly in the area of type inheritance, is significantly different from the first edition.

-- 
Jonathan Leffler                   #include <disclaimer.h>
Email: jleffler_at_earthlink.net, jleffler_at_us.ibm.com
Guardian of DBD::Informix v2003.04 -- http://dbi.perl.org/

Received on Tue Sep 02 2003 - 06:31:08 CEST

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Paul G. Brown: "Re: does a table always need a PK?"
Previous message: Bob Badour: "Re: Is mysql a RDBMS ?"
In reply to: Bob Badour: "Re: does a table always need a PK?"
In reply to Bob Badour: "Re: does a table always need a PK?"
Next in thread: Paul G. Brown: "Re: does a table always need a PK?"
Reply: Bob Badour: "Re: does a table always need a PK?"

Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]

Original text of this message