Whilst it's true that SQL isn't essential for a relational database, it's a fairly useful simplification to say a relational database is a thing that responds correctly to SQL and doesn't allow other accesses (ie no subversion).
I'm interested in your remark that relational databases now cope with 'arrays'. Personally I've never seen that in DB2, Jet or SQLite. That just seems so contrary to the original idea of the relational model that you shouldn't have any data whose meaning is not defined by data (in the case of an array you need to understand the significance of relative position - remember relations have no row or column order to stop you playing that game). So I still go back to point i) - you don't need to do this. All you are doing is collapsing a join and computers are so powerful nowadays that you should treat that as an unusual exception. -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Table-within-a-table---tp26125451p26160060.html Sent from the SQLite mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
