On 8 Jun 2006 05:21:07 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm reading, and enjoying immensely, Fabial Pascal's book "Practical
Issues in Database Management."
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.
Modern PostgreSQL is a SQL dbms. What makes pg great is that it is so
expandable...it really leverages the power of SQL.
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?
I would say less faithful. For example 'quel' was dropped in favor of
sql quite some time ago.
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?
right now the commercial market is firmly rooted in sql. open-source
is pretty much the same, although there is less of an emphasis on
tools and more of an emphasis on versatlity through programming
interfaces. Most people don't understand the difference between SQL
and relational and the advantages and disadvantages of each. This is
a failure of academia and is one of the central themes of Fabian's
books.
merlin
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
