Re: Demo: Modelling Cost of Travel Paths Between Towns

From: Nick Landsberg <SPAMhukolauTRAP_at_SPAMworldnetTRAP.att.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 13:16:16 GMT
Message-ID: <AsHnd.941168$Gx4.821407_at_bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>

Alan wrote:

> "Neo" <neo55592_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:4b45d3ad.0411172002.362bcdc4_at_posting.google.com...
> 

>>Neo: [With TM/XDb2] user can ... update the age of any thing whose
>>name is john and has an age, including that of things whose class is
>>unknown at design-time (ie a person, dog, cat, pig, plane, etc in the
>>future). Try coding that in RM.
>>
>>Alan: It doesn't get a whole lot easier
>>
>>Neo: So let's step thru it and fill in the details...
>>
>>Alan: If you can't tell me what data you will want to see two hours
>>from now, you will not be working here much longer...
>>
>>Neo: In AI-type applications, one can't anticipate what data R2D2 will
>>store even two hours from now. I asked you to create a db and query by
>>9AM that will allow R2D2 to store (w/o NULLs and redundancy) those
>>unforeeable things he will see at 11A and still have your 9AM query
>>work correctly. Now you seems to think the request is ridiculous. Your
>>are right, it is difficult to implement in RM in a practical manner.
>>

> 
> 
> I love the way you change the rules. Now it's an AI application, not just a
> database. No one here ever said that an RDBMS is a proper medium for an AI
> application. Nice try, though. EVen with this, there is still no problem
> with any of your contusions, below:
> 
> 

>>Here is how with TM/XDb2:
>>
>>08:45 Sit back and relax as there is no schema to design.
>> XDb2 will accept whatever data R2D2 will give it
>> and store it without NULLs or redundancy. New things
>> need not conform to any predefined tables or schema.

> 
> 
> Bull. You are creating what is essentially a schema every time you create a
> relationship between your data elements (objects?). In the RM it is done in
> advance. In yours, you build relationships as you go. For each and every
> piece of data you need to store. This is NOT scalable by any stretch of the
> imagination.

Hmmm... let's see, if I understand the concept of XDb2 correctly, to describe a rock, I should start with the muons and leptons which comprise electrons, protons and neutrons, which (in turn) comprise the atoms, which in turn comprise the elements which in turn comprise the compounds which are in this this rock. Otherwise, I am being redundant.

<sarcasm>
Sounds pretty scaleable to me.
</sarcasm>

[ SNIP ] NPL

-- 
"It is impossible to make anything foolproof
because fools are so ingenious"
  - A. Bloch

Received on Sat Nov 20 2004 - 14:16:16 CET