In article <3f8cbee1.1656673@shawnews>, Gene Wirchenko
<genew@mail.ocis.net> writes
>seunosewa@inaira.com (Seun Osewa) wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>>Sometimes I wonder why its so important to model data in the "rela-
>>tional way", to think of data in form of sets of tuples rather than
>>tables or lists or whatever. I mean, though its elegant and based
>>on mathematical principles I would like to know why its the _right_
>>model to follow in designing a DBMS (or database). The way my mind
>>sees it, should we not rather be interested in what works?
>
> How do you know it works? Without the theory and model, you
>really do not.
>
And don't other databases have both theory and model?
It's just that all the academics have been brainwashed into thinking
this is true only for relational, so that's what they teach to everyone
else, and the end result is that all research is ploughed into a model
that may be (I didn't say "is") bankrupt. Just like the academics were
brainwashed into thinking that microkernels were the be-all and end-all
- until Linus showed them by practical example that they were all idiots
:-)
Cheers,
Wol
--
Anthony W. Youngman - wol at thewolery dot demon dot co dot uk
Witches are curious by definition and inquisitive by nature. She moved in. "Let
me through. I'm a nosey person.", she said, employing both elbows.
Maskerade : (c) 1995 Terry Pratchett
