Re: dbdebunk 'Quote of Week' comment

From: dawn <dawnwolthuis_at_gmail.com>
Date: 26 Aug 2005 20:38:12 -0700
Message-ID: <1125113887.410289.194700_at_o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>


Marshall Spight wrote:
> dawn wrote:
> > Marshall Spight wrote:
> > >
> > > Another difference between keys and pointers is that
> > > keys are content-addressible, while pointers are
> > > location-addressible.
> >
> > and there have been several prior discussions on pointers that I think
> > got most of us to the point of understanding that the pointers that the
> > relational model were eliminating were related to memory locations.
> > When talking about data that serve as references to other data at the
> > logical level, there is nothing in the relational model that prohibits
> > or even discourages such.
>
> I don't use the word "pointer" for such things. If we broaden
> the term "pointer" that far, it stops meaning much of anything.
> The appropriately generic term for data that *could* serve
> as references to other data at the logical level is "data".

That works for me too, but I read what was written at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DBMS about multivalue databases and pointers and I don't get it. I've heard it before and I think it is hogwash, but it keeps coming back up, and we have established in the past (or at least I have) that sometimes I'm the one bringing the hogwash, so I want to get this straight.

So, is this wikipedia entry correct? I think it is only suggesting that the mv systems navigate using foreign keys (rather than only permitting joins and set functions in the logical layer and doing the navigation under the covers). So, why do they use the term "pointer" for this? Is that page correct the way it is, or should I (or someone) change it?

Thanks. --dawn

>
> > > The differences between keys and pointers are small and
> > > sometimes subtle, but useful nonetheless.
> > >
> > It is interesting to me that the relational model that some say is
> > intended as a logical model for data had as one of its goals a physical
> > issue. What do you make of that? --dawn
>
> I don't know what you're referring to.
>
>
> Marshall
Received on Sat Aug 27 2005 - 05:38:12 CEST

Original text of this message