Re: TRM - Morbidity has set in, or not?

"J M Davitt" <jdavitt_at_aeneas.net> wrote in message news:A47ag.25500$YI5.17664_at_tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...
> Paul Mansour wrote:
> > J M Davitt wrote regarding inverted indexes:

> TRM, on the other hand, would maintain exactly one ordered set of
> values for the domain and everything referencing the same date
> would refer to the same value. Indices aren't really needed. Index
> maintenance - the dreaded B-tree "rotate the root" operation - would
> never occur. Sure, as birth dates are corrected and licenses are
> renewed, the value a given record refers to would change -- but the
> values remain undisturbed and there's no need for index maintenance.

This is just adding one level of indirection. Why is this something new ?

> There is, of course, a trade-off: the record reconstruction table
> has to be maintained. That's significant work and the techniques for
> doing it efficiently are, AFAIK, a closely-held secret. (Not every-
> thing's covered by the patent, you know. When you apply for a patent,
> you have to tell the world how you did it. Some of the most
> profitable industrial secrets are not patented.)

This is the subject of the patent and cannot be a secret. Received on Tue May 16 2006 - 09:26:45 CEST