Re: Relational Databases Lack Relationships

On 2015-10-28, Norbert_Paul <norbertpauls_spambin_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
> Eric wrote:
>> Following a recent catastrophic computer failure I found myself having
>> to browse the internet with the interruption of many more advertisements
>> than I am used to. One amazingly pervasive ad offered me a free download
>> of a book about graph databases. Obviously from a company that makes a
>> "graph database system", whatever that is. Still, after about the 47th
>> viewing, why not, I might learn something.
>>
>> What I have learnt so far is that they use the subject of this post as a
>> section heading, followed by:
>>
>> "For several decades, developers have tried to accommodate connected,
>> semi-structured datasets inside relational databases. But whereas
>> relational databases were initially designed to codify paper forms
>> and tabular structures—something they do exceedingly well—they
>> struggle when attempting to model the ad hoc, exceptional relationships
>> that crop up in the real world. Ironically, relational databases deal
>> poorly with relationships."
>
> Relational databases were initially designed to implement the ideas
> Codd has developed [1] and which he managed to get broad acceptance.
> Obviously he had to struggle for that:
> "... my determination to fight for what I believed was right
> during the ten or more years in which government, industry,
> and commerce were strongly opposed to the relational approach
> to database management." (dedication in [2])
>
>> Aside from needing to find out what on earth they mean by
>> "semi-structured" and "ad-hoc, exceptional relationships", has anyone
>> ever heard, from any other source, that codifying paper forms and tabular
>> structures is what relational databases were designed to do?
>
> I have often heard of that "tabular structure". It is a misconception.
> It is also not surprising to me that a company which sells graph databases
> gives away free books containing criticism on the relational model.

True, of course.

>> I'm not actually sure how much I care, but...
> ... you seem to care.

Perhaps a little...

Eric

-- 
ms fnd in a lbry