From: | Roy Souther <roy(at)silicontao(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Fabian Pascal and RDBMS deficiencies in fully |
Date: | 2006-06-08 20:45:44 |
Message-ID: | 1149799544.3278.59.camel@utopiaplanetia.sti |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
In what way could a database like PostgreSQL not be "faithful to
relational theory"? Does he give any explanation as to what that means?
Some people mistake the word relational for the meaning of
normalization, but they do not have the same meaning. If Fabial is
mistaking relational for normalization then that would make sense
because there is nothing to force the use of normalization.
On Thu, 2006-06-08 at 05:21 -0700, dananrg(at)yahoo(dot)com wrote:
> I'm reading, and enjoying immensely, Fabial Pascal's book "Practical
> Issues in Database Management."
>
> Though I've just gotten started with the book, he seems to be saying
> that modern RDBMSs aren't as faithful to relational theory as they
> ought to be, and that this has many *practical* consequences, e.g. lack
> of functionality.
>
> Given that PostgreSQL is open source, it seems a more likely candidate
> for addressing Pascal's concerns. At least the potential is there.
>
> Some questions:
>
> 1) Is PostgreSQL more faithful to relational theory? If so, do you find
> yourself using the additional functionality afforded by this? e.g. does
> it really matter to what you do in your daily work.
>
> 2) If PostgreSQL is *not* significantly more faithful to relational
> theory than commercial RDBMSs, is it at least on the road to becoming
> more faithful?
>
> 3) If PostgreSQL is not on the road to becoming more faithful to
> relational theory and purity, why not? Is it due to the fact that
> various SQL standards are themselves not fully faithful to relational
> theory, and most RDBMSs have as a primary design goal to be faithful to
> standards (which Pascal implies *are* relationally deficient)?
>
> 4) Which database, commercial or non-commercial, is most faithful to
> relational theory itself, or is headed in that direction the quickest?
>
> Dana
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Royce Souther
www.SiliconTao.com
Let Open Source help your business move beyond.
For security this message is digitally authenticated by GnuPG.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Scott Marlowe | 2006-06-08 20:47:13 | Re: ERROR: for SELECT DISTINCT, ORDER BY expressions |
Previous Message | Matthew T. O'Connor | 2006-06-08 20:42:19 | Re: UTF8 problem |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-06-08 20:47:09 | Re: ADD/DROP INHERITS |
Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2006-06-08 20:44:10 | Re: ADD/DROP INHERITS |