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. 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.
Darren Alcorn
On 7/7/05, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:Darren,
> I was interested as to if there were plans to develop SQL99 nested
> tables. I know with AJAX(tm) starting to grow in popularity that the
> XML features of SQL2003 would prove useful for EnterpriseDB.
I realize that nested tables are in SQL99, but so is SQLJ and a few other
really dumb ideas. As Joe Celko (member of the SQL92 committee) put it, "we
were a committee, and a committee never met a feature it didn't like."
Can you make a use-case for nested tables? It would need to be a fairly
strong one, given that they basically violate the relational model. If what
you're really interested in is XML data support, then I'd suggest focusing on
that instead.
Of course, that's just my opinion.
--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
