>-----Original Message----- >From: Peter Brawley [mailto:peter.braw...@earthlink.net] >Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 3:02 PM >To: Yusuf Khan >Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com >Subject: Re: Codd's rule 8 (physical data idependence) > >>*Applications should not be logicaly impaired when the physical storage >or >>access ethods change.* > >Changing the storage engine for tables, for example from a transactional >to non-transactional engine, changes the database logic. > [JS] Is that really an example of Codd's rule #8? It is a higher-level change than simply going from a hard drive to a RAM drive to magnetic tape, any of which could conceivably be used with any of the storage engines.
>PB > >Yusuf Khan wrote: >> Hello all >> >> Does MySQL 5 conform to Codd's rule 8, i.e. physical data >independence, >> which says that: >> >> *Applications should not be logicaly impaired when the physical >storage or >> access ethods change.* >> >> Any help would be greatly appreciated. >> >> Thanks >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >-- >> >> >> Internal Virus Database is out of date. >> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com >> Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.12/1909 - Release Date: >1/22/2009 7:08 AM >> >> -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
