Re: Why are [Database] Mathematicians Crippled ?

Tegiri Nenashi wrote:
> On Friday, January 30, 2015 at 12:01:04 PM UTC-8, Norbert_Paul wrote:
>>> No, I think you misunderstand what he is trying to do and what he is
>>> asking. He is proposing an extension of the relational model with new
>>> concepts that can deal with data that represents toplogies over other
>>> data. And his question is if practitioners could make sense of these
>>> concepts and use them.
>>>
>>> The answer seems to be "no".
>>
>> Yes, obviously.
>
> There is a reason for that. As Todd J. Green eloquently put it, database
> practitioners are buried in a soul crushing routine work (select * from
> employees and some such). There is not a lot of insight to gain there.

I'd say

   exists(select *

     from DatabasePractitioners DP
     where DP.id not in(
        select BSCRW.id
        from ThoseBuriedInASoulCrushingRoutineWork BSCRW
     )) -- up to typos .

> It is not a secret that [SQL] database applications in science are mediocre,
> at best.

Actually, to me this is new. Can you give examples?

> Still, I would suggest looking up there (rather than in "more
> practical" fields. For example, chemical databases do some nontrivial
> matching of substances. Likewise, in protein chemistry topology might be very
> important.

I personally would stress "might" because I don't know how topology is related to protein folding. This could be an interesting question, though. Received on Sun Feb 01 2015 - 18:21:53 CET