On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 12:53:14PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Darren,
>
> > I was mainly interested because of the simplicity it seems to add for
> > implementing an application using the database. While those accustomed
> > to writing SQL queries using joins and keys might prefer it for many
> > understandable reasons, there is something to be said for
> > multidimensional data structures. It would be like if you _had_ to have
> > multiple arrays to store information in C instead of using a
> > multidimensional array. I'm open to debate on the subject as I'd love to
> > be convinced that Oracle is wrong.
>
> Ooops. Our discussion somehow got shifted off list. Suffice it to say
> that not everyone agrees with me.
Where "not everyone" includes one C. J. Date ;)
> > I think the XML features are important and I'd be more suited
> > writing something more straight forward versus re-inventing the
> > wheel. I brought it up for debate, because I thought it was
> > something that should be thought about.
>
> Yes, I just don't see how nested tables relate to XML.
To me, they don't relate directly, as tables (nested or otherwise)
have no intrinsic row ordering, where XML does. Nested tables is a
Good Thing(TM) though :)
Cheers,
D
--
David Fetter david@fetter.org http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 510 893 6100 mobile: +1 415 235 3778
Remember to vote!
