Re: Why relational division is so uncommon?
From: paul c <toledobythesea_at_oohay.ac>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 12:06:31 GMT
Message-ID: <bHlYh.133519$DE1.42002_at_pd7urf2no>
>
>
>
>
> Whatever it is, you can easily derive 'paid' from that 'whatever' and
> just go from there as if you had the 'paid' atttribute. I am not sure
> what else I can add to that ...
>
> vj
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 12:06:31 GMT
Message-ID: <bHlYh.133519$DE1.42002_at_pd7urf2no>
V.J. Kumar wrote:
> paul c <toledobythesea_at_oohay.ac> wrote in
> news:RqcYh.132205$DE1.59908_at_pd7urf2no:
>
>
>>V.J. Kumar wrote:
>
>
>>>Then there is no way to determine whether or not it was paid and your >>>question cannot be answered in principle ! Of course, you can use >>>some other attribute name to reflect the invoice status, like >>>'status' for example. >>> >>>vj >>> >>> >> >>If Invoice had no "paid" attribute, I presume there would be a >>Payments relation. >>
>
>
> Whatever it is, you can easily derive 'paid' from that 'whatever' and
> just go from there as if you had the 'paid' atttribute. I am not sure
> what else I can add to that ...
>
> vj
Thanks, bad example I guess, will try to think of better ones.
p Received on Fri Apr 27 2007 - 14:06:31 CEST