Re: foundations of relational theory?

Originally posted by byrmol

> I have never used PICK, so this whole thread is interesting...

>

> It does however remind me of a passage from Carl Sagan's "A Demon
> haunted world. Science as a candle in the dark."

>

> * The following is a butchered representation...and should be
> considered faction.

>

> The year is 1850 and the Queen of England gathers around all the
> Engineers she can think of. She has a special project for them. "I
> want my voice to be heard across my many domains". At the time, radio
> and television are still many years away and the world is still
> enthralled by magnetism.

>

> It is indeed a daunting task as none of the underlying science has
> been done. But they all try there best and propose different
> solutions.

>

> The Queen settles on the "multi-phase-megaphone" solution which is
> just a human chain shouting at each other.

>

> Meanwhile, the first real nerd (Maxwell) is tinkering about with the
> experimental results of electricity and magnetism. He already knows
> there is a relationship between the 2 but just cannot bridge the gap.
> In a burst of brillance, he asks himself "What would happen if these
> experiments occured in a vaccum?". He plugs in the numbers, makes
> another brillant assumption, and IMO, makes probably the most
> underated scienctific advancement in history. He discovers that
> electricity, magnetism and the speed of light are related. The
> electromagnetic radiation/spectrum has been found paving the way, for
> radar, TV and of course relativity...

>

> When Maxwell presents his finding to the Engineers Guild, they
> scream. "But it is just theory", "It will never work in the real
> world". "We already have a solution that works, why do we need this
> theory stuff."

>

> Maxwell responds that the theory was formulated from known
> observations, is reproducible, is subject to less data errors (chinese
> whispers) and is much better than the other solution for wide ranging
> applications.

>

> The best the Engineers Guild can respond with is "But megaphones are
> cheap and keep me employed."

Not a very good analogy really. I think you meant to equate Pick to a megaphone and relational theory to something far more advanced?

Given that both models have been around for decades I suppose you can provide links to some of the many millions of actual implementations of true relational database theory so we can compare to see which one is the best at meeting real world requirements? If you find you're struggling and have to use SQL-relational examples instead I expect you'll at least then be able to point to some direct comparisons to show how SQL-relational systems are so much more efficient, cost-effective - better in *some* way at least? Some example where someone switched from SQL to Pick and found it very expensive to do so, or maybe where they went the other way and found that the move from Pick to SQL allowed them to cut costs, downsize and improve system reliability etc., etc..

Or maybe it was meant as a wind-up? I like a good laugh - but maybe you can do better. Mildly frustrating. 4/10.

--
Posted via http://dbforums.com