Re: Can these constraint be implemented in an RDBMS ?

"Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_golden.net> wrote in message news:BbGdnQ0Z24RY-9vdRVn-jg_at_golden.net...
> "ben brugman" <ben_at_niethier.nl> wrote in message
> news:c24p2j$iv3$1_at_reader08.wxs.nl...
> >
> > "--CELKO--" <joe.celko_at_northface.edu> wrote in message
> > news:a264e7ea.0403021202.7bf84cc_at_posting.google.com...
> > > >> In another thread I was asked to produce an example which can not
> > > be implemented with RDBMS constraints. <<
> > >
> > > I am not sure what you want here.
> >
> > To learn, and so far this thread has learned me things.
> > The views of others, the given solution in Tutorial D and your
> > solution. (Which I'll try to implement as an exercise).
> >
> > > -- create the account sets; one set per account?
> > No the customer did not specify this limitation, but from your
> > solution I must be able to construct a solution without this
> > limitation and still follow your construction.
> >
> > I still do not think that it is practical to implement all constraints
> > (if possible) in an RDBMS but this thread has at least made me
> > think about certain solutions.
> > (We have to be realistic about riscs, costs and gains.)
> >
> > (The problem I still have is that some people have such a
> > fundamentalistic standpoint against or for a certain situation;
> > that it is difficult to weight the arguments of those people.
> > I see this with RDBMS people and with OO people.
> > Both groups are totally convinced that they are right, but
> > they have conflicting views.

>

Do your views conflict ?

>
> Received on Thu Mar 04 2004 - 10:54:10 CET